Implicating cum_everywhere → excessive_cum
Link to implication

Reason:

If there's cum all over the image, isn't that usually an excessive amount? Like here:

post #665265

Btw, I'm not suggesting an alias because excessive_cum can still concentrate itself in one part (usually around an ass or vagina). Cum_everywhere does seem excessive by default, however.

I always used excessive_cum as "excessive cum from a single source", i.e. as hyper_cum if there were such a tag. On that basis I would oppose the alias implication.

HOWEVER, there is some issue in the fact we alias both cum_covered and cum_inflation to that tag (and as far as I'm concerned, the first should not be aliased there).

At a glance, cum_everywhere seems a bit overtagged. Cum on couple of bodyparts isn't what I'd consider as 'everywhere'.

Maybe the tag should be cleaned, but even then, I'm not sure if it's always excessive. What about bukkake? If there's fifty pitchers, does it still count as excessive if there's cum everywhere? I think it's kind of excepted..

Circeus said:
HOWEVER, there is some issue in the fact we alias both cum_covered and cum_inflation to that tag (and as far as I'm concerned, the first should not be aliased there).

I concur. It's problematic for a couple of reasons. For instance, macro on micro can have cum_covered or cum_inflation tags without the image really containing excessive amount of cum.

I do guess you're both right about the number of participants influencing if something's really excessive. Hmmm...

Yeah, perhaps not the best idea then.

Circeus said:
On that basis I would oppose the alias.

It's an implication, not an alias. Like I said, that would be a terrible idea for pretty obvious reasons. :P

Circeus said:
I always used excessive_cum as "excessive cum from a single source", i.e. as hyper_cum if there were such a tag. On that basis I would oppose the alias.

This is how I treat it.

Up to the point of causing injury, perhaps death, is there even such a thing as excessive cum?

Can there be such a thing as excessive cum?
A drop? A squirt? A stream? A river?
I'm sure that all of these are appealing to some.
A puddle? A pond? A lake? An ocean?
We've begun our journey, so strap yourself in.
We've covered a city, a country, the planet, our sun,
Our solar system, our galaxy, our universe, our multiverse too.
Don't yet wipe your chin, we've only just begun.
Is it excessive yet? Who cares? It's fun!

Sorry. Bored and tired, so you get a bad cum poem.

-1 for implicating as well due to aforementioned reasons, unless we come up with a new tag for individual output.

Sharp_Coyote said:
Up to the point of causing injury, perhaps death, is there even such a thing as excessive cum?

Semen is supposed to be a medium for carrying spermatozoa (aka sperm), so in that sense it could definitely be excessive. In the form of inflation/cum fetishism, then probably no.

Chessax said:
Semen is supposed to be a medium for carrying spermatozoa (aka sperm), so in that sense it could definitely be excessive.

Some species have evolved to produce (by human-scale) massive amounts of semen. Whenever multiple males mate with the same female, the male with the largest volume of semen tends to be most successful. They're basically flooding out the competition.

From what I remember, boars and rats are some examples of this.

Nah, the technicalities and mistags aren't worth the convenience of implicating it, even if it sounds good on paper.

Denied

parasprite said:
Nah, the technicalities and mistags aren't worth the convenience of implicating it, even if it sounds good on paper.

Denied

Can we consider unimplicating cum_covered for the same reasons we're not implicating this?

Circeus said:
Can we consider unimplicating cum_covered for the same reasons we're not implicating this?

I'd be okay with that.

Edit: Done