Aliasing human_to_anthro → human_on_anthro
Link to alias
Reason:
Synonymous; alias is better English and well established
Updated by Zzzzz00000
Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
Aliasing human_to_anthro → human_on_anthro
Link to alias
Synonymous; alias is better English and well established
Updated by Zzzzz00000
214365 said:
Aliasing human_to_anthro → human_on_anthro
Link to aliasReason:
Synonymous; alias is better English and well established
I don't believe those are synonymous, though, although I'd understand it being confusing; took me a minute to process too! human_to_anthro involves one person at minimum, but human_on_anthro involves two at minimum. Additionally, we could see a non-sexual instance of human_to_anthro, but human_on_anthro is by definition sexual
Updated by anonymous
rezi said:
I don't believe those are synonymous, though, although I'd understand it being confusing; took me a minute to process too! human_to_anthro involves one person at minimum, but human_on_anthro involves two at minimum. Additionally, we could see a non-sexual instance of human_to_anthro, but human_on_anthro is by definition sexual
Wouldn't it be easier to say human_to_anthro sounds like transformation images while human_on_anthro is clearly relations related?
Updated by anonymous
Ko-san said:
Wouldn't it be easier to say human_to_anthro sounds like transformation images while human_on_anthro is clearly relations related?
Probably, yeah, that sounds simpler. I'm not the most elegant writer :P
Updated by anonymous
Um, those are new transformation subtags. Human_to_anthro: human transforming to anthro. Just like it says in the wiki.
Human_on_anthro is also explained in the wiki. It's for interspecies sex, and unrelated to human_to_anthro.
Updated by anonymous
rezi said:
Probably, yeah, that sounds simpler. I'm not the most elegant writer :P
I wouldn't say there was a lack of elegance, but rather too much. Sometimes it's best just to get to the point.
Updated by anonymous
Ko-san said:
I wouldn't say there was a lack of elegance, but rather too much. Sometimes it's best just to get to the point.
Duly noted, thanks. I'll keep it in mind for the future
Updated by anonymous