Is it just me or this tag is way too undertagged and ambiguous?

Just as an example, which of the following images would you tag with cute?

post #622587 post #619247 post #619173 post #619451 post #619431 post #609269 post #608177 post #606898 post #605097 post #596081

Indeed, the tag is entirely subjective.

Vote to alias with invalid_tag

Out of those, I'd only tag it for the Mew, the third image on the middle row, and the Weregarurumon. And possibly for the first and last images, whatever those are. The rest are too ambiguous. It's best used for images where 'cute' is the main theme (or at least one of the main themes); and it shouldn't be confused with 'pretty' or 'handsome', which are too subjective to be tagged.

I've suggested invalidating cute, and the admin decision was that it will be kept. So there's not much point discussing that again.

If it's not going to be invalidated, there should at least be some arbitrary guidelines, like character size and no sexual content.

Maybe you could also include this http://i.imgur.com/3jsuN4w.jpg

Just had a thought.

If all previous decisions insist that this is a problem that should be maintained, not solved, for the sake of searching and organization,

and just keeping up with recent uploads with this tag isn't enough, because tags can get added after a picture has been uploaded,

then maybe we need a way to search and organize Tag History.

Say somebody goes to a post uploaded 3 years ago, and edits the tags so it includes "cute."

Searching "cute" on Tag History would yield this recent change and any other post updated to include this tag.

After the initial clean-up (21k posts with "cute"), it would only need to be checked every other day or so.

-1, there are tags much worse that stick around and I will fully admit to using that one a lot

Genjar said:
Out of those, I'd only tag it for the Mew, the third image on the middle row, and the Weregarurumon. And possibly for the first and last images, whatever those are. The rest are too ambiguous.

Speaking of ambiguous, the rows depend on browser size. I have no idea what image "the third image on the middle row" might be, since I only see two rows (one of 8, one of 2).
---

I would use "cute" for these:
post #619173 post #619451 post #596081

Genjar said:
And possibly for the first and last images, whatever those are.

Never played Halo, huh? :c

blackest_vulture said:
Is it just me or this tag is way too undertagged and ambiguous?

Just as an example, which of the following images would you tag with cute?

post #622587 post #619247 post #619173 post #619451 post #619431 post #609269 post #608177 post #606898 post #605097 post #596081

Well, the last five images are tagged as cute but not the others.

The biggest issue that I've seen with the cute tag is when it gets used for things like pinups (e.g., "a cute guy"). Mildly annoying, but I'm not sure we have much of an alternative at the moment.

I've never liked the cute tag because to me it's just like the tags hot, sexy, beautiful, etc.

You simply need to ask yourself, when a user searches for cute, what does he want to find?

He wants to find pictures of stuff that he alone finds "cute". Thus, he won't find most of the stuff he's looking for by searching for this tag, and he will get a lot of stuff he doesn't want to see.

A useless tag :P

Tags need to be objective an unambigious.

parasprite said:
The biggest issue that I've seen with the cute tag is when it gets used for things like pinups (e.g., "a cute guy"). Mildly annoying, but I'm not sure we have much of an alternative at the moment.

Alternative is using set(s). To be honest I won't cry if this tag is invalidated. Currently most similarly subjective tags (like attractive, handsome) were aliased away and this tag is exception because it is used frequently. I don't like exceptions.

Granberia said:
Alternative is using set(s). To be honest I won't cry if this tag is invalidated. Currently most similarly subjective tags (like attractive, handsome) were aliased away and this tag is exception because it is used frequently. I don't like exceptions.

Site has plenty of exceptions and I have a list of them if people are really upset with cute :o

It's kinda subjective but i don't think it's that bad of a tag, i tend to use this tag mostly when the artistic style of the piece tends to deviate from original creations (i.e. Originally an Horror character is being portrayed as a cartoonish style with everyone happy) or when the picture depicts act that contributes for someone saying it "Daaaawwww".

I got to agree that it really is subjective since what i consider cute might not be something other's consider cute, that causes minor confusion since it doesn't have a standard where everyone can rely on, but i don't think it's hurting the site that much that warrants a deletion of the tag.

One of the examples i would give of something cute would be.

post #618834 post #592322 post #582259 post #573901 post #569383

But how i stated it earlier that's only my opinion.

Just_Another_Dragon said:
It's kinda subjective but i don't think it's that bad of a tag, i tend to use this tag mostly when the artistic style of the piece tends to deviate from original creations (i.e. Originally an Horror character is being portrayed as a cartoonish style with everyone happy) or when the picture depicts act that contributes for someone saying it "Daaaawwww".

Chibi tends to do that a lot (although that one has a more specific style than something like cute does).

https://e621.net/forum/show/141071