As it stands, TWYS's improvements to search clarity apply only on a per-image basis, failing to provide any benefit for those of us who care as much about the contents of the image as the strict visuals. This is especially problematic in a fandom with such rich creative energy going into character designs; not everything about a character or scene can be unquestionably and simultaneously visible in a single illustration, thereby excluding vast numbers of images from searches that would otherwise apply to them. Blah blah blah, I'm sure this argument has been covered a hundred thousand times, so moving on:

Now, I know I might as well be asking the moon to change its orbit when it comes to TYWS, so I'm not even going to bother requesting any changes to it at all(!?). Instead, I'd like to request a separate category of tags entirely for non-visible aspects of an image for the sake of search accuracy - I feel that this would represent a compromise that might satisfy both sides of the issue, and quite possibly bring more content (example) to the site that is otherwise kept from it on the grounds of chronic misleading tags.

The practicals are straightforward enough, with an unseen:<tag> (or similar, whatever works) addendum for tags (based on information from source/commissioner/related), applied as an optional modifier to existing tags so bloaty creation of duplicate/separate tags wouldn't be an issue. For example, you have an image of a MtF character, but nothing in it expressly demonstrates the nature of the character - under what we have now, that character would not be elgally eligible for the intersex tag, and therefore not showing up in a search for relevant images. However, with this suggestion, that character could then be tagged with unseen:intersex and then show up in searches for either unseen:intersex and either:intersex but NOT intersex itself, allowing "accurate" tagging (thus keeping the artists happy) without requiring any modification to the TWYS rules whatsoever (thus keeping the admins happy).

Could this actually work, or should I prepare to be yelled at? I feel like it could make a lot of people happy.

The database doesn't support your idea, but otherwise this is basically what I'd like to see implemented some day.

But right now not possible without hurting the search functionality for everybody.

While this seems like it could work in theory, I don't think being tagged as both unseen:cuntboy and male would be much different to character owners/artists than just being tagged male.

I really don't think that it would help much more than existing option to say that character is transsexual in description of a pic. It's pretty much like having description standardized. At least when it comes to artist/character owner. It may be somehow useful to people searching/blacklisting, but I don't know if it's worth the effort.

Use the description field.

Granberia said:
I really don't think that it would help much more than existing option to say that character is transsexual in description of a pic. It's pretty much like having description standardized. At least when it comes to artist/character owner. It may be somehow useful to people searching/blacklisting, but I don't know if it's worth the effort.

I'd love it if artists could include written notes in the images themselves for this purpose, but that'd require the unanimous cooperation and coordination of thousands of unrelated strangers on the Internet. Yikes.

Otherwise, searching by description contents is really, really unreliable.. and searches are the crux of the entire issue. Great as it is to elaborate on an image's contents, it doesn't really help if that image can't be located efficiently in the first place.

NotMeNotYou said:
The database doesn't support your idea, but otherwise this is basically what I'd like to see implemented some day.

But right now not possible without hurting the search functionality for everybody.

How hard do you think it'd be to modify it? Worst comes to worst, I suspect a donation drive to compensate the devs' time to get it working might not be unrealistic, given how polarising the issue is.

Imuthes said:
I'd love it if artists could include written notes in the images themselves for this purpose, but that'd require the unanimous cooperation and coordination of thousands of unrelated strangers on the Internet. Yikes.

You can use the character's wiki entry (accessible through the ? on the same line) and write whatever applies to the char

Imuthes said:

How hard do you think it'd be to modify it? Worst comes to worst, I suspect a donation drive to compensate the devs' time to get it working might not be unrealistic, given how polarising the issue is.

The tag category would be simple to add, the unseen:/either: search terms much less so. What we would need to do is create a new meta tag with conditions along the lines of "either:<tag> = "use <tag> or <tag>_(unseen)" (something like that). It's not impossible, it's just not as high of a high priority as other areas of the site (bugs, site performance, migrating Ruby, API, new features, etc.).

The closest we could do without modifying the database is using unseen:<tag>or probably <tag>_(unseen), but searches like *male* would pull up lots of other things like male/female, etc.

I sorta hosted an idea a while back saying we needed a small category that added a second search function. You have one for site policy tags. And one that is specifically for the artist to add whatever is the correct tags.
You wouldn't be able to search inn the normal tag search and get the artist implemented tags. Likewise vise versa.

But it got shot down.

Esme_Belles said:
I sorta hosted an idea a while back saying we needed a small category that added a second search function. You have one for site policy tags. And one that is specifically for the artist to add whatever is the correct tags.
You wouldn't be able to search inn the normal tag search and get the artist implemented tags. Likewise vise versa.

But it got shot down.

This wouldn't help much for gender tags, but I kind of like how SoFurry handles it.

parasprite said:
This wouldn't help much for gender tags, but I kind of like how SoFurry handles it.

Unofficial would not be so bad as long as it can be made not part of a search by selecting an option in my profile or something.

Still kind of against it since it's still just placating people who don't get the tagging system and why it is actually effective

Don't bother, no one will listen.

Ozelot said:
Don't bother, no one will listen.

That's funny, because they are. At least OP came up with something unlike you.

Ozelot said:
Don't bother, no one will listen.

how this thread is full of replies if nobody listens?

Mutisija said:
how this thread is full of replies if nobody listens?

just because there's replies doesn't mean they're listening

Ozelot said:
just because there's replies doesn't mean they're listening

I disagree. We are having a legitimate discussion about his suggestion. Even some of us admins agree with his suggestion but we can't implement it yet. If we weren't listening, there would be no discussion about it whatsoever.

Ozelot said:
no one will listen
...
just because there's replies doesn't mean they're listening

Stop projecting. Seriously. Not everybody thinks like you.

E621's backend is full of crufty legacy stuff and devs really do have to think very carefully before making any major change.

TheHuskyK9 said:
I disagree. We are having a legitimate discussion about his suggestion. Even some of us admins agree with his suggestion but we can't implement it yet. If we weren't listening, there would be no discussion about it whatsoever.

Skimmed the replies. They're mostly about how it won't work.

savageorange said:
Stop projecting. Seriously. Not everybody thinks like you.

E621's backend is full of crufty legacy stuff and devs really do have to think very carefully before making any major change.

Shut up. I don't care. I'm giving constructive criticism.

savageorange said:
Stop projecting. Seriously. Not everybody thinks like you.

E621's backend is full of crufty legacy stuff and devs really do have to think very carefully before making any major change.

^

Ozelot said:
Skimmed the replies. They're mostly about how it won't work.

So agreeing = listening and disagreeing = not listening?

Shut up. I don't care. I'm giving constructive criticism.

Don't be rude to others :V

TheHuskyK9 said:
So agreeing = listening and disagreeing = not listening?

Yes, basically.

Don't be rude to others :V

Hey, I didn't start on calling people "projecting."

I find it funny that you're considering an observation of what you're doing to be insulting.

You know what, you're right. We'll just stop paying attention to you.

Knotty_Curls said:
I find it funny that you're considering an observation of what you're doing to be insulting.

You know what, you're right. We'll just stop paying attention to you.

Not insulting because it's not really true. I find it funny you consider telling someone to shut up insulting when they're just spouting posts trying to be arm chair psychologist.

Go ahead and stop replying to me, I mean obviously you should just give up while you're still just slightly behind.

k

Knotty_Curls said:
k

*yawn*

Alright enough. Anyone else continuing the drama will get a record.

Friends, don't fight.

Let's turn back to thread:
I actually have NO ways with TWYS tagging, so it's not my job.

The exact means detailled in the suggestion aren't really important, as long as there's a clear and efficient differentiation between general tags and unofficial tags, which I feel is necessary to really resolve the issue.

Adding an additional category à la SoFurry could actually work just as well, but only if it was populated by parentheticals like Parasprite mentioned - term quantity consolidation could be resolved by having the unofficial tag imply the general tag. Then, the only concern would be unofficial tags showing up in wildcard searches.. How hard are those to modify? Is a "greylist" possible, preventing tags from being searched but not from showing up in other searches?

Imuthes said:

Then, the only concern would be unofficial tags showing up in wildcard searches.. How hard are those to modify? Is a "greylist" possible, preventing tags from being searched but not from showing up in other searches?

We have nothing like that in the system, so it would have to be written from scratch. I don't know how difficult that would be to do, but I suspect it wouldn't play well with the search (since nothing seems to).

That being said, I have keep a sort of log for suggestions like this and I've put yours down in it along with a link to this thread.

Thanks! Here's hoping it helps.