I had a thought: Ratings can be treated like tags, right? rating:e, rating:q, rating:s. Might it be possible to reduce work on rating changes by setting up implications that automatically change the rating to Explicit if it contains anything that fits its description?

exposed lower genitals (penis, pussy etc.), sex acts, high amounts of violence/gore, or various body fluids. Scat and watersports, which commonly fall under extreme sexual fetishes, are always tagged as explicit.

Would a rating tag added to the tags change the rating accordingly? Just a thought. Of course, if we had complex arguments for implications, we could do the same with Questionable and Safe, but there is otherwise nothing else we can do on that front. At the very least, this would make things easier.

I see a lot of images wrongly tagged with pussy when they should only have camel_toe, working through pussy rating:q makes it easy to clean up these tags and move anything to an explicit rating if required. If the pussy tag automatically made posts explicit, these would probably go undetected.

Someone's suggested that before, but if I remember right then metatags can't be implicated. Which is unfortunate. There'd be plenty of uses for those (such as automatically implicating image sizes to hi_res, etc).

Tuvalu said:
I see a lot of images wrongly tagged with pussy when they should only have camel_toe, working through pussy rating:q makes it easy to clean up these tags and move anything to an explicit rating if required. If the pussy tag automatically made posts explicit, these would probably go undetected.

It's merely a theory at this point. It requires testing, anyways, unless someone can confirm that this is a thing that works. If it DOES work, that could be a problem, as we would need to program some sort of hidden tag that marks pictures that are properly tagged (So only people who actually understand the tagging system can do it, thus weeding out newbies that don't know the difference between camel_toe and pussy, etcetera), something like hidden:properly_tagged, AND we would probably need that complex argument thing for implications, in order to provide an airlock against improperly-tagged camel toes and the like. Every day, that idea becomes increasingly handy. At the very least, this would be helpful on other fronts. The sex tag is indubitably a definition of the Explicit rating, and cum is another one that is quite obvious.

there's like 9 pages of images that are questionable and tagged sex so I don't think this would work

memeboy said:
there's like 9 pages of images that are questionable and tagged sex so I don't think this would work

A lot of those should either be explicit or not tagged with sex at all

Tuvalu said:
A lot of those should either be explicit or not tagged with sex at all

True. It's probably going to be awhile until implications with these so called metatags would be of any use. All the more reason to have complex arguments in aliases, implications, and, if I get my wish, suggestions, as well as including a way to make it easier to differentiate between properly-tagged posts and posts with unconfirmed statuses.