Beanjam said:
Honestly, I thought this place had gotten over it's "muh slippry slope" boner. If there are people who are going to want larger_standing_unbound_clothed_mtf_anthro_to_feral_dom_on_smaller_kneeling_bound_nude_ftm_feral_to_anthro_sub, then how likely do you think nuking this tag will be to stop them?

The same arguments come back over and over, but for all the ones already settled they can be re-ended (relatively) quickly by pointing them to forum XXXX where the decision was made.

This one effectively reverses a previous decision and tag consolidation and puts massive re-tagging projects on the books where there is already plenty to do.

Beanjam said:
No, seriously, I want to know how you can possibly think your logic is any less warped than theirs.

My logic is this: there is already a way to get nearly the same result using tags that are already fairly extensively tagged. It doesn't get the exact result this tag gives, but that tag won't give the full wanted results anyway until a massive amount of tagging gets done. Until then, they'll still have to use the current approach.

I'm all for tagging linked to each pictured individual in an image to facilitate more precise searching. However, under the current system trying to do that will cause massive tag bloating and likely never get widely enough implemented *correctly* to actually be useful.