So, I've always understood why the general community has to follow the, *cough* strict *cough* rules regarding tagging and such, but, when it comes to the ARTISTS direct involvement in the posting or commenting/tagging of the picture, why would they have to meet the same "TWYSNWYK" nonsense.

The idea that the featuring artist is being told that "It's not your place to tell us who or what your character is, you WILL accept how the community lists it." seems kind of silly.

Essentially, it's a flat out argument that no artist in any way is allowed to determine what sex, age, orientation or style their art is, if the community doesn't tag it properly/accurately, oh well, go add a second cock to it.

It's ludicrous that the ARTIST gets told to go fuck off when THEY are the taggers. If THEY want their character defined as gay/straight/bi then so be it, who the hell is anyone else to tell them they aren't allowed to have their persona identified as such if it isn't blatantly obvious.

In essence, look at it in the obverse, if a character appears gay, but the artist knows the character is in fact not, they aren't allowed to correct it, and as such, their character will continue to be misconstrued as such. Same is entirely true for the opposite, or, in fact, for any inaccurately labelled tag.

Some people should take time to back away from rating/jerking off to the new pics and actually look at the ideology behind why artists aren't exempt, and, if they want to screw up the tagging of their own art? So be it. If the end result is their art gets lost, it's not your job to "safeguard" their art from themselves and is rather presumptuous of yourselves.

There also seems to be an imbalanced war against adding tags involving outside knowledge and not adding relevant tags at all.

An example of this, I'm setup to blacklist everything MLP, Females, and Breasts. Yet, every day I check the new postings, about a dozen or so blaze right through the filter because people don't bother to add no-brainer tags. Then they don't ultimately get added before the new pile of incoming move the art along. Why not, when posting, have a basic check-box list of common things (ie male/female, breasts/penis/vag) or some such that can later use the normal tagging system to update and add. Would take care of it in one fell swoop I would imaging.

Kyiro.Grey said:
The idea that the featuring artist is being told that "It's not your place to tell us who or what your character is, you WILL accept how the community lists it." seems kind of silly.

We are not telling them who or what their character is, we're telling them how it will be tagged. E621 is not an image gallery for documenting characters and their stories / traits / sexual preferences / etc. This is an imageboard used to facilitate blind searches. This can only be done correctly if the images are tagged objectively. Tagging Wolfbutt Fagpaw as gay when no sexual action is taking place makes no sense and services no one who is searching for gay images.

Kyiro.Grey said:
Some people should take time to back away from rating/jerking off to the new pics and actually look at the ideology behind why artists aren't exempt, and, if they want to screw up the tagging of their own art? So be it. If the end result is their art gets lost, it's not your job to "safeguard" their art from themselves and is rather presumptuous of yourselves.

We're not safeguarding their art. We're safeguarding our users and policies. If we let artists screw up the tags, it's the users who pay, and we will not allow that. Allowing exceptions just because they're the character owners or artists will cause the structure to break down and fail. If a few tags really bothers the owners of the artwork, they can have it removed. The tags are a service to the users, not the owners of the art.

ippiki_ookami said:
We are not telling them who or what their character is, we're telling them how it will be tagged. E621 is not an image gallery for documenting characters and their stories / traits / sexual preferences / etc. This is an imageboard used to facilitate blind searches. This can only be done correctly if the images are tagged objectively. Tagging Wolfbutt Fagpaw as gay when no sexual action is taking place makes no sense and services no one who is searching for gay images.
We're not safeguarding their art. We're safeguarding our users and policies. If we let artists screw up the tags, it's the users who pay, and we will not allow that. Allowing exceptions just because they're the character owners or artists will cause the structure to break down and fail. If a few tags really bothers the owners of the artwork, they can have it removed. The tags are a service to the users, not the owners of the art.

A proposed future tagging system will fix this, as it will allow characters to have their own classes.. which can have apparent and unapparent items in it.

Aurali said:
A proposed future tagging system will fix this, as it will allow characters to have their own classes.. which can have apparent and unapparent items in it.

This sounds like a mess and a headache to keep a watch over aurali.

Aurali said:
A proposed future tagging system will fix this, as it will allow characters to have their own classes.. which can have apparent and unapparent items in it.

@_@ YEAH, that sounds like it'd get really confusing...

Princess_Celestia said:
This sounds like a mess and a headache to keep a watch over aurali.

actually it's quite simple (in my head anyway). No details for you though.

Welcome to the Internet. *commercializing sounds*

Aurali said:
A proposed future tagging system will fix this, as it will allow characters to have their own classes.. which can have apparent and unapparent items in it.

That sounds... confusing. And not very helpful. :/

Test-Subject_217601 said:
That sounds... confusing. And not very helpful. :/

It will actually be quite helpful; once its revealed we'll be sure to make it quite clear how everything works so its all nice and neat.

Test-Subject_217601 said:
That sounds... confusing. And not very helpful. :/

AbsebaroKoon said:
Welcome to the Internet. *commercializing sounds*

Princess_Celestia said:
It will actually be quite helpful; once its revealed we'll be sure to make it quite clear how everything works so its all nice and neat.

it's part of the super awesome change the name of the game that is so big it's probably gonna break everything 5 times over update.

That's slated at the end of november due to the massive size of the update... that and the implications of failure are so big I gotta get it right on the first try.

ippiki_ookami said:

Words, and then

"If we let artists screw up the tags, it's the users who pay, and we will not allow that."

I can't believe you actually said that out loud....

Artists screw up the tags? For real? It's the USERS who screw up tagging the artists intent.

How is it ruining a users search if, I search for a gay character and a character the artist tagged as gay shows up? As opposed to a USER failing to tag it or tag it properly and it not show up at all?

Madness.

What you are stating is that an artist isn't, then, capable of correctly tagging their own art? and that a user, who has no knowledge whatsoever of the piece will instead fix this mistake?

I assume orientation of a character based on what I'm TOLD it is, not what I SEE it is. Otherwise how ELSE would we "out" so many senators/congressmen @_@

I'm directed to a stories character because I'm TOLD who and what they are, not from what I SEE.

Best example I can think of:

<(O_O)> <- That Kirby face is gay because I created it and said it was.

You would have NEVER been able to indicate that from the art itself, and it would NEVER show up in a list of "gay" art because the tag would never have been added had I, the creator, not said it was so, and to be done so...

It's not a personal vendetta against anyone, it's just a major flaw in the logic behind how an artist submitted work is handled when tagged.

Image board or not, independent of being an artists "repository" or not, you can't just discount the artist's input because "this isn't their site". Not to mention, THEM tagging their art hurts noone, including the users, other then themselves, if THEY tag it wrong.

It has nothing to do with the end user. The idea that "the users won't find it if the artist tags it" is ridiculous. If I were looking for a picture by an artist that I, before hand, knew was gay/straight/bi from outside knowledge and came here, I would be looking for those tags.

If you are going by the "blind search" method, meaning you, for example, know no artists, no characters etc, and are just looking for quick art, you would do a contextual search with keywords including what you are looking for, and if correct tags were removed, you would completely miss the artists work that qualified for your search anyway, because someone ELSE didn't grasp the necessary information to appropriately tag a submission.

Quit arguing with the mods. They've released their statement, that is how it is done on this site. If you don't like it you're free to migrate to one of the hundred other 'boorus out there.

Blaziken said:
Quit arguing with the mods. They've released their statement, that is how it is done on this site. If you don't like it you're free to migrate to one of the hundred other 'boorus out there.

No u.

It isn't an arguement, otherwise I would be saying "They're all stupid heads"

It's an attempt to grasp the logic behind the "discussion" since this is how it's done on this site.
Also "they" didn't say anything, Ippiki said something...

In fact, not only is it NOT an arguement, it's opened discussion about new features ;)

You're not saying 'they're all stupid heads' but you're refusing to even listen to a word they say. They've told you over and over that the artist needs to tag like any other user, which is objectively, so people can easily find the art with no idea of the circumstances behind it. You're bitching and whining about a point that's been made hundreds of times before you and to the same effect.

The tagging system isn't going to change just because you don't like it. Get over it. You don't need to understand the 'logic', you just need to follow the rules or you can follow in the footsteps of the many, many banned users who have fallen afoul of this ruling.

The logic is simple. Images are tagged based on what are in them. Anybody without knowledge of the characters or image should be able to look at the image and agree with the descriptive tags, or tag what has been overlooked if needed. This is the only way that the tagging system produces relevant search results for all users, by going by objective definitions, spelling them out in the wiki.

When are we getting a story-time corner, Aurali? >:|

Kyiro.Grey said:
I can't believe you actually said that out loud....

Artists screw up the tags? For real? It's the USERS who screw up tagging the artists intent.

Artists are users. We hold them to the same standards as everyone else. Just because they drew the art doesn't mean they may operate outside our policies just because they want everyone to know inside info about their characters. If disclosing their characters' orientations is that important to them, they can leave comments about it.

Kyiro.Grey said:

How is it ruining a users search if, I search for a gay character and a character the artist tagged as gay shows up? As opposed to a USER failing to tag it or tag it properly and it not show up at all?

Because where does it end? What if there are multiple characters just standing around and the artist or character owners want to tag each of their orientations? You'll have gay, straight, bisexual all slapped on an image where they don't belong. Imagine what searches would look like if we let that happen. That's what we're trying to prevent here. If you're searching for a solo character you know is gay, search his name, species, or an artist you know who has drawn him. Just because he's into dudes doesn't mean that should be tagged. We don't tag sports_fan or lawyer or intelligent just because they are (unless there's visual evidence in the image).

Kyiro.Grey said:
If you are going by the "blind search" method, meaning you, for example, know no artists, no characters etc, and are just looking for quick art, you would do a contextual search with keywords including what you are looking for, and if correct tags were removed, you would completely miss the artists work that qualified for your search anyway, because someone ELSE didn't grasp the necessary information to appropriately tag a submission.

No argument here. This is why we encourage thorough tagging. And we have no shortage of users who like going through and tagging the shit out of stuff. But sometimes things get missed, that's just part of it.

Kyiro.Grey said:

Madness.

Sparta.

Kyiro.Grey said:

What you are stating is that an artist isn't, then, capable of correctly tagging their own art? and that a user, who has no knowledge whatsoever of the piece will instead fix this mistake?

I'm not saying that at all. Tagging things that aren't evident in the image itself isn't correct tagging. You are right about the second part though. The random user will have an unbiased, objective viewpoint of the image, and their tagging habits will be more consistent with our policies.

Kyiro.Grey said:

<(O_O)> <- That Kirby face is gay because I created it and said it was.

You would have NEVER been able to indicate that from the art itself, and it would NEVER show up in a list of "gay" art because the tag would never have been added had I, the creator, not said it was so, and to be done so...

Not entirely sure I follow this analogy. This Kirby face would not be tagged gay even if you said he was. Tell us in the comments, just not the tags.

ippiki_ookami said:
Things, then...

Sparta.

This made me smile ^_^

I acquiesce to the idea that, indeed, the artist could comment as an alternative. I also see the reason when put in context of multiple characters on an image. So, perhaps it isn't so much that there is flaw with the tagging methodology, but instead that there isn't quite a strong enough method for handling the situation.

Perhaps this newly mentioned "classing" system will cover the odds and ends of things that don't quite fully fit with one solid tag or another. I would assume this allows for "community" tags to be the main search point, but for there to be flags akin to "The artist mentioned that or says:..."

See! Discussion! It's a beautiful and lost art. It seems far too often that when someone offers an opposing opinion of dissent, i's immediately considered ranting, venting, trolling or just mongering, which puts people on the offensive instead of debating :P

Really, the entire point of the analogy was, I just assume everything is straight until told otherwise, and, if an item isn't tagged as gay I pass it over and miss other potential art by the individual. In a blind search case, that is what is going to happen the majority of the time.

Kyiro.Grey said:
It's not a personal vendetta against anyone, it's just a major flaw in the logic behind how an artist submitted work is handled when tagged.

Actually, the flaw is in the fact that the word we use to describe a type of sexual interaction is the same as the words used to describe a part of a person's identity. It can make it difficult for a 'casual' user to immediately identify that the tag is referring to the actions, not the character. Unfortunately, there's not really an easy way to fix it without switching our tags to something really cumbersome and awkward. For the most part, once the user has the concept explained to them--that it's to help the right people find their art, that the tags are about the interactions going on, not describing the character, etc--it tends to make more sense.

Image board or not, independent of being an artists "repository" or not, you can't just discount the artist's input because "this isn't their site". Not to mention, THEM tagging their art hurts noone, including the users, other then themselves, if THEY tag it wrong.

The users not being able to find what they want IS hurting the users. If I'm interested in seeing gay porn, and I search gay, and i find... let's say.. this: post #231409 or post #230838 and I'm told that the male character is gay, and the female is raping him, or whatever... well.. that's gonna kill my boner if I am vigorously anti-female.

It has nothing to do with the end user. The idea that "the users won't find it if the artist tags it" is ridiculous. If I were looking for a picture by an artist that I, before hand, knew was gay/straight/bi from outside knowledge and came here, I would be looking for those tags.

more likely, you would search the artist's name, or the character's name, or something like wolfy-nail male dragon rather then wolfy-nail dragon gay. :)

See! Discussion! It's a beautiful and lost art. It seems far too often that when someone offers an opposing opinion of dissent, i's immediately considered ranting, venting, trolling or just mongering, which puts people on the offensive instead of debating :P

:)

Really, the entire point of the analogy was, I just assume everything is straight until told otherwise, and, if an item isn't tagged as gay I pass it over and miss other potential art by the individual. In a blind search case, that is what is going to happen the majority of the time.

I guess the thing for me is.. if you like Teh Gay, as it were, is your enjoyment of a naked, seductive looking male laying on a beach chair next to a pull with an erection throbbing happily as he gazes at the camera really dependent on KNOWING if the character is homosexual? I mean.. A heterosexual female, and a gay man would both find enjoyment with that picture... ... perhaps you should change your search parameters to something like male -female or male solo or some such :) Searching for 'gay' will just get you smut :) which, some would say, is not a bad thing. :)

XD Excellent points all, the only issue I can see, is being "vigorously anti-female" I have any keyword you can imagine related to the female body blacklisted, and then people don't tag anything obvious. The only thing that leaves as an option is to blacklist 'art with a person in it".

The only real reason I don't wind up with my "posts" listing displaying a lot of things on my blacklist is because I then go through the visible ones and add the appropriate tags. Rather time consuming for something that should be standard law to do WHILE the image is being uploaded.

But, I suppose a lot of people just don't think to add tags like that. Ah well.

Thank you to the mods/admins that dove into the topic and took a moment to give different viewpoints instead of just spewing that I have no place to ask or question ^_^, which is almost where it went D=>

Also, Ippiki, a question if I could. There is an image posting that sparked this post, which we have both commented in, and, in the interest of having others not quote it and catapulting the argument further, can I have my comments removed by-chance? Or should I just go there and comment to my new found viewpoint? :P Or safer yet, back away and not make eye contact with it again o_o

Penis.

Kyiro.Grey said:
Also, Ippiki, a question if I could. There is an image posting that sparked this post, which we have both commented in, and, in the interest of having others not quote it and catapulting the argument further, can I have my comments removed by-chance? Or should I just go there and comment to my new found viewpoint? :P Or safer yet, back away and not make eye contact with it again o_o

comments hidden

Kyiro.Grey said:
XD Excellent points all, the only issue I can see, is being "vigorously anti-female" I have any keyword you can imagine related to the female body blacklisted,

You're doin' it right. :)

and then people don't tag anything obvious. The only thing that leaves as an option is to blacklist 'art with a person in it".

I wish we could autotag everything :C but people forget sometimes. if it helps, the 'vigorously anti-male' people have to deal with the same thing.

The only real reason I don't wind up with my "posts" listing displaying a lot of things on my blacklist is because I then go through the visible ones and add the appropriate tags. Rather time consuming for something that should be standard law to do WHILE the image is being uploaded.

And thank you for doing that! You make the site a better place every time you update the tags~ It's important to remember that some people do forget sometimes.... it's an innocent enough mistake.. but people who are chronically bad about forgetting.. you could send them a friendly note to 'encourage' them, or point them out to a moderator, and ask them to send them a friendly note of reminder. just be nice about it because its' incredibly rare that anyone does these things maliciously, and is most often just someone having a brain derp. :)

{quote]Thank you to the mods/admins that dove into the topic and took a moment to give different viewpoints instead of just spewing that I have no place to ask or question ^_^,[/quote]

:)