It really irks me how there are pictures tagged with a certain character or creature that's always in a really tiny picture in the background, or a tattoo or something you wouldn't even notice.

It's clearly not the focus of the image, and next to nobody is searching for pictures specifically for these tiny little visual eastereggs, all it does is clutter up the searches.

no

none pizza left beef

1. claerly it is something that is noticed if it is being tagged

2. focus or not is irrelevant as far as what to tag, all that matters is taht it is visible(1).

3. Any tag that proscribes something that is visible(1) is always relevant, just because you dont find it relevant does not mean another user or guest doesn't find it relevant, just a wild guess but there are more then a million people that access this site a day all of them have different interests, likes and motivations for accessing this site and of course for each and everyone of them they have different things that are relivant to them, e621 is a publicly accessible and editable archive, not a private paysite or personal archive.

4. clutter comes from mistags and redundancies from 2 or more tags standing for the same thing, not from the number of tags a post has been given.

Ratte said:
no

Why? There are not even important things, completely tagged. Removing the "tagme" is still allowed. Why hold on to trivial things, if not even the important is maintained? I think it would be good if at least such poster figures or things which do not belong to the reality of the image somehow separated.

Darou said:

2. focus or not is irrelevant as far as what to tag, all that matters is taht it is visible(1).

Maybe, but a User who serch for Krystal, will not find Batman with a Krystal poster.

Darou said:

3. Any tag that proscribes something that is visible(1) is always relevant, just because you dont find it relevant does not mean another user or guest doesn't find it relevant, just a wild guess but there are more then a million people that access this site a day all of them have different interests, likes and motivations for accessing this site and of course for each and everyone of them they have different things that are relivant to them, e621 is a publicly accessible and editable archive, not a private paysite or personal archive.

E621 is far from an archive, since only the English version of a work is allowed here, if 2 are present. In an archive all versions would be preserved.

Right, everyone likes other things, but it can be exaggerated with the argument. No one searches or in extreme cases, finds a tiny detail that is hidden in a 5000x5000 picture. Such things lead your argument, which is praiseworthy and correct, into the absurd. It is hard to find much because of the missing important "tags" and the constant change of the tags. The then also still secondary things in the daytime, without which one can filter them, does not make it easier.

PlüschTiger said:
Why? There are not even important things, completely tagged. Removing the "tagme" is still allowed. Why hold on to trivial things, if not even the important is maintained? I think it would be good if at least such poster figures or things which do not belong to the reality of the image somehow separated.

German - Deutsch

Warum? Es werden nicht einmal wichtige Dinge, vollständig getaggt. Das entfernen des "tagme" ist dennoch erlaubt. Warum an nebensächlichen Dingen festhalten, wenn nicht mal das wichtige eingehalten wird? Ich fände es gut wenn man wenigstens solche Poster Figuren oder dinge welche nicht zur Realität des Bildes gehören, irgendwie getrennt würde.

Maybe, but a User who serch for Krystal, will not find Batman with a Krystal poster.

E621 is far from an archive, since only the English version of a work is allowed here, if 2 are present. In an archive all versions would be preserved.

Right, everyone likes other things, but it can be exaggerated with the argument. No one searches or in extreme cases, finds a tiny detail that is hidden in a 5000x5000 picture. Such things lead your argument, which is praiseworthy and correct, into the absurd. It is hard to find much because of the missing important "tags" and the constant change of the tags. The then also still secondary things in the daytime, without which one can filter them, does not make it easier.

German - Deutsch

e621 ist weit entfernt von einem Archiv, da nur die Englische Version eines Werkes hier erlaubt ist, wenn 2 vorhanden sind. In einem Archiv würden alle Versionen erhalten bleiben.

Richtig, jeder mag andere Dinge, doch man kann es mit dem Argument auch übertreiben. Niemand sucht oder im Extremfällen, findet, ein winziges Detail, welches in einem 5000x5000 Bild versteckt ist. Solche dinge führen dein Argument, welches Lobenswert und Richtig ist, ins Absurde. Es ist schon wegen den fehlenden Wichtigen "tags" und dem Ständigen verändern der Tags schwer manches zu finden. Das dann auch noch nebensächliche dinge in die tags kommen, ohne das man sie filtern kann, macht es nicht einfacher.

Plueshtiger what is "important" thou? The point im making is that the answer is different for everyone. Anyone deciding whats relevant or not beyond the objective twys is going be in the wrong.
Plueshtiger you cannot say no one searches for such small details because you dont now every single person who looks at this site, the fact that the tag exists and is being tagged to such posts defeats the argument.

Also tagme is for bookmarking posts that users deem have tags missing and think other users can add what they couldnt come up with. tagme can be removed exsactly because different people have different concepts as to what is important and if a post has enough tags or not, only ruling is that post should have at least 6 tags as far as e621 goes.

As far as versions of posts go, they do actually get preserved, posts that have japanese text in them and alternative versions that have japanese text replaced by english text or french and english versions for example

post #1074095 post #1024658

Posts can be in any language and can come from any non-english speaking country, e621 only requires all tags to be in latin based script, that has nothing to do with the actual language.

PS: Users who search for Krystal, will not find Batman with a Krystal poster???? You are aware people can search with more then a single tag do you?

PlüschTiger said:
Why? There are not even important things, completely tagged. Removing the "tagme" is still allowed. Why hold on to trivial things, if not even the important is maintained? I think it would be good if at least such poster figures or things which do not belong to the reality of the image somehow separated.

German - Deutsch

Warum? Es werden nicht einmal wichtige Dinge, vollständig getaggt. Das entfernen des "tagme" ist dennoch erlaubt. Warum an nebensächlichen Dingen festhalten, wenn nicht mal das wichtige eingehalten wird? Ich fände es gut wenn man wenigstens solche Poster Figuren oder dinge welche nicht zur Realität des Bildes gehören, irgendwie getrennt würde.

Maybe, but a User who serch for Krystal, will not find Batman with a Krystal poster.

E621 is far from an archive, since only the English version of a work is allowed here, if 2 are present. In an archive all versions would be preserved.

Right, everyone likes other things, but it can be exaggerated with the argument. No one searches or in extreme cases, finds a tiny detail that is hidden in a 5000x5000 picture. Such things lead your argument, which is praiseworthy and correct, into the absurd. It is hard to find much because of the missing important "tags" and the constant change of the tags. The then also still secondary things in the daytime, without which one can filter them, does not make it easier.

German - Deutsch

e621 ist weit entfernt von einem Archiv, da nur die Englische Version eines Werkes hier erlaubt ist, wenn 2 vorhanden sind. In einem Archiv würden alle Versionen erhalten bleiben.

Richtig, jeder mag andere Dinge, doch man kann es mit dem Argument auch übertreiben. Niemand sucht oder im Extremfällen, findet, ein winziges Detail, welches in einem 5000x5000 Bild versteckt ist. Solche dinge führen dein Argument, welches Lobenswert und Richtig ist, ins Absurde. Es ist schon wegen den fehlenden Wichtigen "tags" und dem Ständigen verändern der Tags schwer manches zu finden. Das dann auch noch nebensächliche dinge in die tags kommen, ohne das man sie filtern kann, macht es nicht einfacher.

The tags aren't only used for the purpose of looking for images with whatever fits the tag. Someone might already know what image they want, and instead use the tags for what they know the image has. If someone knows what image it is they want, and that image had batman with a krystal poster, they can search using batman krystal_(star_fox) poster and be much more likely to find it with everything not containing it removed. It even works in reverse. If they know it did not contain something, or they are just looking but specifically do not want certain images, but just aren't looking for that and therefore wouldn't blacklist it, they can filter out anything WITH that tag. If it can be used to search or avoid, whether browsing or finding something specific, it's useful.

I agree with OP. It should be policy to omit tags that are correct but obviously misleading.

An example: lots of outdoor images show birds flying in the sky. Should they all be tagged with feral bird? I doubt it. The benefits of technical correctness and marginally improved searchability are far outweighed by the clutter suffered by people trying to search for images where those features are prominent. We need to be practical about this.

If we ever get tag groups "background detail" would definitely be a superb grouping option.

Darou said:
Plueshtiger what is "important" thou? The point im making is that the answer is different for everyone. Anyone deciding whats relevant or not beyond the objective twys is going be in the wrong.
Plueshtiger you cannot say no one searches for such small details because you dont now every single person who looks at this site, the fact that the tag exists and is being tagged to such posts defeats the argument.

Also tagme is for bookmarking posts that users deem have tags missing and think other users can add what they couldnt come up with. tagme can be removed exsactly because different people have different concepts as to what is important and if a post has enough tags or not, only ruling is that post should have at least 6 tags as far as e621 goes.

As far as versions of posts go, they do actually get preserved, posts that have japanese text in them and alternative versions that have japanese text replaced by english text or french and english versions for example

post #1074095 post #1024658

Posts can be in any language and can come from any non-english speaking country, e621 only requires all tags to be in latin based script, that has nothing to do with the actual language.

4 tags minimum, not 6; and we only keep the original version and the english translation (if available). All other versions will be deleted, as will be note translations into any languages besides english.

PlüschTiger said:
Why? There are not even important things, completely tagged. Removing the "tagme" is still allowed. Why hold on to trivial things, if not even the important is maintained? I think it would be good if at least such poster figures or things which do not belong to the reality of the image somehow separated.

Good luck trying to objectively determine what makes something important enough to tag, and then babysitting post tags to make sure it stays that way.

It's Tag What You See[/u]-- if something is seen, people will tag it.

What's important to you might be trivial to someone else, and what's vital to someone else may be unimportant to you.

NotMeNotYou said:
If we ever get tag groups "background detail" would definitely be a superb grouping option.

4 tags minimum, not 6; and we only keep the original version and the english translation (if available). All other versions will be deleted, as will be note translations into any languages besides english.

pardon me, i admit i rushed ahead of my self on that one. Also i didn't mention anything about notes but thanks for the information.

background detail catagories would certainly be a good thing but were would you draw the line, sence because we have tags like solo_focus or duo_focus, just being confined to the background or out of focus isnt enough...

Darou said:
pardon me, i admit i rushed ahead of my self on that one. Also i didn't mention anything about notes but thanks for the information.

background detail catagories would certainly be a good thing but were would you draw the line, sence because we have tags like solo_focus or duo_focus, just being confined to the background or out of focus isnt enough...

It's not so hard when there's a fairly clear divide between the two but it would get tricky when there is no divide.

post #1244011 <- Pretty much everything beyond that railing is the background.
post #133074 <- At what point do background details start?

BlueDingo said:
post #133074 <- At what point do background details start?

That one's a bit tricky, but I think this is a decent separation of foreground and background.

Darou said:
background detail catagories would certainly be a good thing but were would you draw the line, sence because we have tags like solo_focus or duo_focus, just being confined to the background or out of focus isnt enough...

The real problem is fan articles and advertising in a picture (posters, stuffed toys, games, PC game on the PC screen of the character, symbols like those of Batman, ...). All these things are actually secondary to explaining the picture. When is looking for one here after the picture of a Playstation? I think times something similar the threat has also opened.

BlueDingo said:
It's not so hard when there's a fairly clear divide between the two but it would get tricky when there is no divide.

post #1244011 <- Pretty much everything beyond that railing is the background.
post #133074 <- At what point do background details start?

This is not what I mean. This is completely normal. See my answer above. What I mean is this:

post #1117060<- Renamon only as a image

post #1138183<- 6 character, but only 2 anthro

Ratte said:
Good luck trying to objectively determine what makes something important enough to tag, and then babysitting post tags to make sure it stays that way.

By the way, this is already today and you know. Alone as far as gender is concerned. In the x-ray change, it was impossible for users to find the images again. The constant change of the tags on e621 does not make it any easier.

Ratte said:
It's Tag What You See[/u]-- if something is seen, people will tag it.

kamimatsu said:
The tags aren't only used for the purpose of looking for images with whatever fits the tag. Someone might already know what image they want, and instead use the tags for what they know the image has. If someone knows what image it is they want, and that image had batman with a krystal poster, they can search using batman krystal_(star_fox) poster and be much more likely to find it with everything not containing it removed. It even works in reverse. If they know it did not contain something, or they are just looking but specifically do not want certain images, but just aren't looking for that and therefore wouldn't blacklist it, they can filter out anything WITH that tag. If it can be used to search or avoid, whether browsing or finding something specific, it's useful.

I and others, have problems with the secondary tags since I can not separate them from what I am looking for. The search can not tell me whether Renamon is present as a figure or as a picture on a poster (within the picture). The search lists then synonymous pictures, which have not what the user is looking, but the day have, since somewhere is a picture of what he is looking for.

Ratte you know that the search is not a scalpel, it is a big mesh net and the number of tags which can be used at the same time is limited. In addition, you can assume that maybe the half of the pictures do not even have the most important tags. I always see the anthro, breasts, feral and obvious things missing, up to the sex of the figure.

Kamimatsu not every user is looking for targeted. A user is looking for pictures of Krystal and he also enters that. If you are still looking for other details (sex impregnation .....) then you get as normal user already slowly problems, since you can use only 6 or 8 tags in the search. In addition, the search is not there to enter what one is not looking. The Blacklist is also not always helpful, since it only functions if the tag is present and it functions.

That's a lot of crap so I'm not going to bother with quotes.

Well done, you've discovered that the site's tagging system is flawed. It's almost like it's just as flawed as any other tagging system or something. Some of it is going to be manual picking-and-choosing posts for what you do and don't want to see. Welcome to a site where things are based on users and not by a single brand of artificial intelligence singlehandedly determining everything to your heart's content.

As long as we have no specific tag types to upload with (such as gender and/or genitals, body form, number of characters, whatever the fuck) and only go by number of tags used in the first place, that's all we'll be able to go by.

What determines what things are important enough to tag upon upload?
What determines what's important enough to tag at all?
What's going to babysit the tags to ensure they stay a certain way? Not you, I'm pretty damn sure.

If something is noticed, it's therefore able to be noticed, and will therefore be tagged. You know, like the tagging system is there to do.

PlüschTiger said:
Kamimatsu not every user is looking for targeted. A user is looking for pictures of Krystal and he also enters that. If you are still looking for other details (sex impregnation .....) then you get as normal user already slowly problems, since you can use only 6 or 8 tags in the search. In addition, the search is not there to enter what one is not looking. The Blacklist is also not always helpful, since it only functions if the tag is present and it functions.

You can blacklist tag combinations and the lack of a tag, or both at once.

If there are fewer tags to have available, how do you expect this to make finding things less difficult?

JAKXXX3 said:
That one's a bit tricky, but I think this is a decent separation of foreground and background.

I can understand where this thread is coming from, still this pretty much highlights the issue.

Even if in some cases it's easier to determine what's minor detail in background and what's more revelant, I'm almost certain that there will be at least dozen variations with this picture where some would draw that red line.

And if we only start tagging the so called "clear cases", then were is the line drawn what is clear case? And what about if image has something which someone can use for searching for that specific image, then it isn't tagged because it was ruled insignificant?

There are flaws in the current tagging system and I don't like to search birds and figure out the bird was 2 pixels in the background instead of main focus. However shoving this kind of ruling on type of tagging in use doesn't work and especially not with current technical limitations either. Enforcing would also be nightmare.

kamimatsu said:
You can blacklist tag combinations and the lack of a tag, or both at once.

If there are fewer tags to have available, how do you expect this to make finding things less difficult?

The Blacklist does not always work correctly and only if the tag is present !!!!!! I can block several tag combinations I know. Which one should I pick? The Blacklist is not suitable for this. There are pictures which I find very nice, although they come from a category which I do not like. Therefore, users like me, the blacklist brings little.

You do not have to ban such secondary tags. It is however a difference if you have a search 1000 images or 700 if you all removed where the what you are looking for only as a poster or as a game in a console of the character that is currently playing. Unfortunately, you will not find any tag combinations, because if you work with tag combinations, then you automatically ban many pictures which you do not want to ban.

I personally disturb more such copyright tags. Figures, which are licensed and therefore bring many other tags, which is only because they are depicted somewhere on the poster, bed cover or other of the Anthro in the picture is. A possibility of identification would be (krystal_ (merchandise), krystal_ (Picture), krystal_ (figure), some prefix to separate them from real figures.

Apart from that, you do not have to list every tiny ant. TWYS does not mean TWYS with a magnifying glass or microscope.

Ratte said:
That's a lot of crap so I'm not going to bother with quotes.

Well done, you've discovered that the site's tagging system is flawed. It's almost like it's just as flawed as any other tagging system or something. Some of it is going to be manual picking-and-choosing posts for what you do and don't want to see. Welcome to a site where things are based on users and not by a single brand of artificial intelligence singlehandedly determining everything to your heart's content.

As long as we have no specific tag types to upload with (such as gender and/or genitals, body form, number of characters, whatever the fuck) and only go by number of tags used in the first place, that's all we'll be able to go by.

If you have a bad day or bad mood, I ask you to leave the answers. Just you as an admin should know that one should be a certain courtesy in the forum were. For my part, I had sensibly tried to present my point of view. In addition, I have limited myself to a limited part of the subject. Moreover, it is an impertinence to describe what I wrote as crap.

Ratte, the easiest would be to increase the minimum amount of tags to 12, or more. The minimum quantity of 4 is completely overhauled, especially since the species categories have been expanded. Only the species consumes 2-3 days + artists and the goal is reached and no one knows what it is when the tagme is gone. You would have a lot more "tagme", but you desert at least where still needs to work. Alone the tags for the basic data in the "how to: tag" would already need 10 or more. In addition, the "how to: tag" page should be revised. It should be pointed out more what should be described.

Ratte said:
What determines what things are important enough to tag upon upload?

https://e621.net/wiki/show?title=howto%3Atag

• Artist

* Gender
* Character
* Fetishes
* Species
* Position
* Sexual positions/acts
* Location
* Objects in the image

An admin told me once, "every day the picture explains". If it were after me everything could be given, but if posters and other copyright figures (which does not have to do with the plot and characters, see my two examples), then one should be able to filter their figures from the search.

Ratte said:
What determines what's important enough to tag at all?

This question has already been explained by examples in my earlier reply.

Ratte said:
What's going to babysit the tags to ensure they stay a certain way? Not you, I'm pretty damn sure.

You're right. You can thank your colleagues for this. Users like me, who despite the language barrier, try to participate productively, are ignored by admins (repeated) and asked to stay out of forum, wiki and co., Since I have help from google (I should show the native speakers so respect !!!). This is what I call an impertinence. Just for the fact that I am writing here, I will probably get a warning, how should someone under the circumstances babysit, for something which will not come anyway? For such a babysitter job I would need also info from admins and since these hardly answers, it is pointless to try something like that.

I am also registered on another picture page, if I label pictures there, then come 15-30 tags per picture partly. Why? Because I do what I do and where I do it seriously. Even Cotributor and Janitor on the e621 remove the tagme, although basic tags like anthro, breasts, female, male and much more is missing. Those users should know the rules. They also get an amnesty and a green.

The admin on the other picture page has suggested to me personally to apply as a mod, because my language does not care, he is interested in what I do and with which he was satisfied. I tagged, I report spam, I report trolls, vandalism and so on. However, the answers also hardly PN, as the admins here.

Just for the info, the text took me about 3 hours. I wonder why I actually do this, if I am at the end even of Admins still almost offended.

PlüschTiger said:
https://e621.net/wiki/show?title=howto%3Atag

Those are recommendations/suggestions as far as content types listed go, not the rule. Not every picture will have a named character or identifiable species, not every picture has fetishes, sexual poses or even a location...

Also just a suggestion get to the point, keep it short, we dont care if you hate the admins or had some form of approval from staff on another site. We dont care for hearing how Honorable you are to have held back from being blunt, also you do well to keep track that your not contradicting your own argument.

PlüschTiger said:
The Blacklist does not always work correctly and only if the tag is present !!!!!! I can block several tag combinations I know. Which one should I pick? The Blacklist is not suitable for this. There are pictures which I find very nice, although they come from a category which I do not like. Therefore, users like me, the blacklist brings little.

You do not have to ban such secondary tags. It is however a difference if you have a search 1000 images or 700 if you all removed where the what you are looking for only as a poster or as a game in a console of the character that is currently playing. Unfortunately, you will not find any tag combinations, because if you work with tag combinations, then you automatically ban many pictures which you do not want to ban.

I personally disturb more such copyright tags. Figures, which are licensed and therefore bring many other tags, which is only because they are depicted somewhere on the poster, bed cover or other of the Anthro in the picture is. A possibility of identification would be (krystal_ (merchandise), krystal_ (Picture), krystal_ (figure), some prefix to separate them from real figures.

Apart from that, you do not have to list every tiny ant. TWYS does not mean TWYS with a magnifying glass or microscope.

No, because blacklisting a combination, where multiple tags are on the same line, only blacklists images that contain ALL tags present. blacklisting -poster will blacklist anything that DOESN'T contain that tag. blacklisting poster -krystal_(star_fox) will blacklist images that have posters AND don't have krystal. If they have no poster or if they have krystal, they are not blacklisted. That's why you can use multiple tags on one line when blacklisting.

This also works with searching. Searching krystal_(star_fox) -poster will return images that contain krystal but NOT a poster. For searching, it only looks for at least one if at least two tags contain a tilde "~".

deagaw said:
next to nobody is searching for pictures specifically for these tiny little visual eastereggs

I am when I find an image and try to find it here. The fewer posts a tag appears on, the fewer posts I have to look at before finding the one I was looking for.

But I agree that it's a problem when the post contains another image and then that image is tagged too. I don't know how to fix that problem though becaus all my other possible solutions have problems too.

• Don't tag contained images at all.
• Always tag contained images.
• If the contained image is available as a post on e621, don't tag it, otherwise do.
• Make the tags a tree instead of a list, create a node in the tree for each contained image and put the contained image's tags only on that node.
• Create an "import" tag (e.g. import:6268) which makes tags from a specified post available on the post it appears on without actually copying over all of the tags.

All of these have obvious problems but it might be worth pondering possible solutions.
Tag-trees could be applied to characters as well (e.g. on post #1030754 char:artica_sparkle{ blue_hair } char:tag_(character){ male } and on post #1311002 char:tenshi_cat{ blue_hair } char:jezekin{ male } would allow you to search for char:*{ blue_hair } char:*{ male } which would only yield images with at least 2 characters, one of them has blue_hair and the other is male.) But I doubt that would ever be implemented.

I just tag what I see. If I see a tree in the background, I'm gonna tag tree :V

Again, a lot of quote-jockeying I don't care to play to.

If you have a bad day or bad mood, I ask you to leave the answers. Just you as an admin should know that one should be a certain courtesy in the forum were. For my part, I had sensibly tried to present my point of view. In addition, I have limited myself to a limited part of the subject. Moreover, it is an impertinence to describe what I wrote as crap.

No.

Ratte, the easiest would be to increase the minimum amount of tags to 12, or more. The minimum quantity of 4 is completely overhauled, especially since the species categories have been expanded. Only the species consumes 2-3 days + artists and the goal is reached and no one knows what it is when the tagme is gone. You would have a lot more "tagme", but you desert at least where still needs to work. Alone the tags for the basic data in the "how to: tag" would already need 10 or more. In addition, the "how to: tag" page should be revised. It should be pointed out more what should be described.

"I don't know how any of this works, but here's what you should do instead."

Gotcha.

https://e621.net/wiki/show?title=howto%3Atag[/quote]

That is a guideline for help with tagging, not a strict law.

This question has already been explained by examples in my earlier reply.

No it wasn't. The entire point is that determining importance over presence is the epitome of subjective tagging. We are trying to move away[/b] from that, not make it the very basis of our tagging system.

You're right. You can thank your colleagues for this. Users like me, who despite the language barrier, try to participate productively, are ignored by admins (repeated) and asked to stay out of forum, wiki and co., Since I have help from google (I should show the native speakers so respect !!!). This is what I call an impertinence. Just for the fact that I am writing here, I will probably get a warning, how should someone under the circumstances babysit, for something which will not come anyway? For such a babysitter job I would need also info from admins and since these hardly answers, it is pointless to try something like that.

I can thank my colleagues for preferring we have staff who are actually able to read the language of the location where the site is physically based? Sure, I'll let them know.

I babysit people who cause actual problems, not use translators. I have no idea where that idea even came from.

I am also registered on another picture page, if I label pictures there, then come 15-30 tags per picture partly. Why? Because I do what I do and where I do it seriously. Even Cotributor and Janitor on the e621 remove the tagme, although basic tags like anthro, breasts, female, male and much more is missing. Those users should know the rules. They also get an amnesty and a green.

The admin on the other picture page has suggested to me personally to apply as a mod, because my language does not care, he is interested in what I do and with which he was satisfied. I tagged, I report spam, I report trolls, vandalism and so on. However, the answers also hardly PN, as the admins here.

Just for the info, the text took me about 3 hours. I wonder why I actually do this, if I am at the end even of Admins still almost offended.

Because we go by a minimum number and not a hard set list of things that absolutely have to be filled out. I don't really give a damn what happens on other sites or their respective administrative decisions. It's almost like these are two different places with two different systems in place.

Ratte said:
Again, a lot of quote-jockeying I don't care to play to.

What do you mean by that? You yourself also quote. In addition, it would be courteous if you would at least take a personified quote so the server remembers that you answer me and I get to see in the profile also. What is your problem with courtesy? I try to be, but if that is not desired, then say it. Courtesy, that's all I expect from other users and admins, just like this from me.

Ratte said:
No it wasn't. The entire point is that determining importance over presence is the epitome of subjective tagging. We are trying to move away from that, not make it the very basis of our tagging system.

Title: Can we stop tagging barely relevant things?

For me, the characters in images that do not exist as real figures (posters, small figures, etc.) mostly irrelevant, exactly that I have tried to clarify in my earlier answer. This is precisely what is at stake here. I have only limited myself to a part of it. If I have 2 anthros in a picture, but 6 names because 4 names come from (among other) images, which hang in the space, that is not helpful in the search. For the reason I say that these characters should not get in the "tags" at least something with which we can take them out of the search, if one does not want to change the TWYS. What I wrote is called compromise, since your answer to the question above was "no". It is not my mistake that I explain to other users 10 times the search and Blacklist is not the perfect solution. The two tools also have limits.

I babysit people who cause actual problems, not use translators. I have no idea where that idea even came from.

I never said that the admins should help me translate. I said: an admin has a problem with that I take a translator to help. An admin is only responsible for real problems? OK.

- My Blacklist has in the past partly not worked properly and what I got from the Admin? No reaction in the past! Last (after more than one year) a simple note that I must enter the "tag" exactly. After 6 times copying, I had already given it up 1 year before, since it did not work.

- I asked if ASCII comments are forbidden, because I've read this somewhere here, and have seen them. No reaction.

- I pointed out a picture where the rules had been violated, chain commentaries, and insults. No reaction and no action against it.

The rest I spare you and me. Maybe I should have turned to you, if you are more helpful in REAL problems.

kamimatsu said:
No, because blacklisting a combination, where multiple tags are on the same line, only blacklists images that contain ALL tags present.

This does not work as you think. The search can not distinguish whether Krystal is as a real figure or as a poster, miniature figure or else there. When Krystal is only as an image or small figure in the picture, we can see them as Negligible. Consequently, their name should not be in the list of "tags", or could get a mark so you can filter them. If I block posters, then it blocks everything with posters, whether or not the pictures interest me. Besides, I have nothing against posters, nothing against small figures, why should I block these images?

Darou said:
Those are recommendations/suggestions as far as content types listed go, not the rule. Not every picture will have a named character or identifiable species, not every picture has fetishes, sexual poses or even a location...

I know that. The argument was about the "tagme". If we have increased the number of "tags" from which the "tagme" can be removed, or automatically set, then we know where something has to be done and even 12 "tags" are reached quickly as "tags" like english_text Other "tags" automatically add = text (cat -> feline, dog -> canine and so on). In this case only 6 is necessary to reach 12.

But even if many images, which have all this, do not carry these "tags", why should we insist on tiny details that 1% of the users noticed? What makes it insist on details when users do not even have the gender or other basic things written? By this I mean not only the Uploader. These are questions we should at least consider. I myself have nothing against details, only if they make the search more difficult.

Why? All that random stuff tagged to the pictures gives me the giggles. Plus it helps me find things which makes me laugh. But the "fart" and "fart fetish" tags should be redone. And "shart" tag should be added to better categorize things.

PlüschTiger said:
This does not work as you think. The search can not distinguish whether Krystal is as a real figure or as a poster, miniature figure or else there. When Krystal is only as an image or small figure in the picture, we can see them as Negligible. Consequently, their name should not be in the list of "tags", or could get a mark so you can filter them. If I block posters, then it blocks everything with posters, whether or not the pictures interest me. Besides, I have nothing against posters, nothing against small figures, why should I block these images?

kamimatsu said:
blacklisting a combination, where multiple tags are on the same line, only blacklists images that contain ALL tags present...blacklisting poster -krystal_(star_fox) will blacklist images that have posters AND don't have krystal. If they have no poster or if they have krystal, they are not blacklisted.

That's why.

kamimatsu said:
That's why.

Then the blacklist is unsuitable for this purpose and see your comment as confirmation.

There is one more thing that we should consider when discussing minor details. Details which only 50% of the users recognize lead to permanent add and delete of such detail "tags". This in turn has the following users who have deleted this detail "tags", are reported and then problems with admins get. This in turn provides additional work for admins. I myself have experienced this, in a similar form, already here.

For the user who does not recognize the detail, it is a wrong "tag" and removes it. Today I saw again users, which with several pictures simply copy the "tags" of the first picture, into the other pictures. Consequently, they do not fully agree with the image. From this case, other users expect when they "tags" to delete such details unknowing.

How does it confirm it? If the two tags are on the same line, then tags not containing krystal would only be blacklisted if they ALSO contained posters. If they are on separate lines, then it's if at least one matches, but the same line means if it doesn't match, it doesn't get blacklisted. It allows you to blacklist whether you meant "any of the tags means blacklist it", "all of the tags meas blacklist it, but if it only matches some then it's fine", "if it doesn't have this, blacklist it", or any combination. That means you have every possible combination available, because it has every possible combination of AND, OR, and NOT.

lets be honest here, does tagging posters of krystal as krystal REALLY impact ability to look for pictures of krystal that much?

tagging is the foundation of this site's functionality. If the only thing you remember about an image you're looking for is a coffee cup on a table, you should be able to search coffee_cup to help you find it. Tag clutter is only really a problem when they only have like one result. And even then it's more of an annoyance.

Ledian said:
lets be honest here, does tagging posters of krystal as krystal REALLY impact ability to look for pictures of krystal that much?

I actually checked the numbers to see exactly how little it would.

I counted exactly 4450 images with Krystal. All of them are the one from Star Fox.
Of those images, 13 are tagged with poster.
Of those, only 7 are not themselves posters of Krystal. I went through manually and checked.
Of those only 4 don't depict Krystal outside of the poster. Again low enough to check manually.

That's 4 images out of 4450. Less than 0.1%.

And add the fact that a regular member of the site with no access to anything not available to everyone else had the means to calculate this in less than 3 minutes. The possible error is small enough that what does exist can be calculated by hand in minutes.

kamimatsu said:
I actually checked the numbers to see exactly how little it would.

I counted exactly 4450 images with Krystal. All of them are the one from Star Fox.
Of those images, 13 are tagged with poster.

Ledian said:
lets be honest here, does tagging posters of krystal as krystal REALLY impact ability to look for pictures of krystal that much?

Krystal and Poster is only 1 Combination example. There are more characters, copyrights and items. Moreover, what I am talking about is only a part of what is the subject here.

Kamimatsu even if you try to turn it like it would go, it does not go. Even if Krystal and Poster brought only 13 pictures, there are much more than posters which bear character images. Bed covers, t-shirt, games, figures, TV, PC monitor, ... and even nappies. Just tell me how to do this in the search (impossible because "tag" limit), without the wrong images are blocked (all pictures, in which the figure is depicted as real)? How to write the blacklist so that you can block what you do not want with more than a dozen tags? There are certainly copyrights, which appear more often in the form of characters.

In short, the search and Blacklist, can not distinguish where the character is. As Ratte says, it is not artificial intelligence.

How can this be a confirmation of what you wrote? If you show me, what I wrote, for the reason you happen to be "That's why." Quote this is a confirmation.

Since the omission of these "tags" was already rejected, it would be helpful in my opinion, if such characters and copyrights have a hint. Something you can specify exactly in the search or blacklist. This does not have to be detailed, it is enough to use a collective name. Something similar we might also generally do with detail "tags".

ippiki_ookami said:
tagging is the foundation of this site's functionality. If the only thing you remember about an image you're looking for is a coffee cup on a table, you should be able to search coffee_cup to help you find it. Tag clutter is only really a problem when they only have like one result. And even then it's more of an annoyance.

This is theoretically correct, but in some cases impossible. Even if it went with a certain "tag" years ago, today can be different. The reason is, which is always summarized, "tags" or made more detailed. Unfortunately, I have not discovered a system to this day.

A possible "tag" would be "pillory". Strangely, I find the images in the search correctly, but the "tag" does not exist in any list (neither tags nor wiki). I know bad example. These summaries also make the search harder, since the "tag" is probably no longer sought alone, but only the collective term.

Better example X-ray, now you can find 2 pictures and these do not match the old meaning. Before the change, there were believe a few hundred.

PlüschTiger said:
Better example X-ray, now you can find 2 pictures and these do not match the old meaning. Before the change, there were believe a few hundred.

Pretty horrible and wrong example since you are thinking of x_ray (13284 posts), not x-ray.

A possible "tag" would be "pillory". Strangely, I find the images in the search correctly ...

You are complaining about aliasing synonyms or spelling variants even though you could not find the x_ray posts because you were using the wrong term.

See how helpful this can be?

... does not exist in any list ...

Wrong: https://e621.net/wiki/show?title=pillory

Darou said:
pardon me, i admit i rushed ahead of my self on that one. Also i didn't mention anything about notes but thanks for the information.

I just included the information about notes because it fits in there with the rest.

PlüschTiger said:
Krystal and Poster is only 1 Combination example. There are more characters, copyrights and items. Moreover, what I am talking about is only a part of what is the subject here.

Kamimatsu even if you try to turn it like it would go, it does not go. Even if Krystal and Poster brought only 13 pictures, there are much more than posters which bear character images. Bed covers, t-shirt, games, figures, TV, PC monitor, ... and even nappies. Just tell me how to do this in the search (impossible because "tag" limit), without the wrong images are blocked (all pictures, in which the figure is depicted as real)? How to write the blacklist so that you can block what you do not want with more than a dozen tags? There are certainly copyrights, which appear more often in the form of characters.

False positives are an inherent flaw in every classification and search system. Your proposals so far would mean the number of tags required to be remembered by users explode. For example we'd need Krystal, Krystal_(Paraphernalia), Krystal_(Background), now replicate this for every popular character in existence. However, how is this supposed to work with things like birds? Do we have bird_(background) as well? Do we do this for every species? What about a cup being held by a person in the foreground vs a cup standing on a table in the background?

Some less relevant results are required to keep the tags usable, and manageable. We already have a steep learning curve and we really don't need to increase that learning curve further because some people don't feel like opening a wrong image once or twice in their search.
Further we're talking here about "less relevant" results, not "wrong" results, opening an image every now and then that's not exactly what someone has been looking for isn't the end of the world.

what the fuck is a bird

hi

Knotty_Curls said:
hi

Pluck.

The next level of tagging should use artificial intelligence. Get commodity machine learning hardware attached to the e621 servers to anal-yze all images. As for the system, it could add numeric prefixes to every recognizable object. For example 1:canine 1:female 1:krystal 1:sex 2:scalie 2:male 2:penis 2:sex 3:phone 4:bed and so on for post #1189111. For searches, use some sort of bracket to group tags together. So <krystal female -poster> <male sex> could be a search.

Yes, e621 will be pretty cool in 2032.

PlüschTiger said:
Kamimatsu even if you try to turn it like it would go, it does not go. Even if Krystal and Poster brought only 13 pictures, there are much more than posters which bear character images. Bed covers, t-shirt, games, figures, TV, PC monitor, ... and even nappies. Just tell me how to do this in the search (impossible because "tag" limit), without the wrong images are blocked (all pictures, in which the figure is depicted as real)? How to write the blacklist so that you can block what you do not want with more than a dozen tags? There are certainly copyrights, which appear more often in the form of characters.

In short, the search and Blacklist, can not distinguish where the character is. As Ratte says, it is not artificial intelligence.

How can this be a confirmation of what you wrote? If you show me, what I wrote, for the reason you happen to be "That's why." Quote this is a confirmation.

Since the omission of these "tags" was already rejected, it would be helpful in my opinion, if such characters and copyrights have a hint. Something you can specify exactly in the search or blacklist. This does not have to be detailed, it is enough to use a collective name. Something similar we might also generally do with detail "tags".

This is theoretically correct, but in some cases impossible. Even if it went with a certain "tag" years ago, today can be different. The reason is, which is always summarized, "tags" or made more detailed. Unfortunately, I have not discovered a system to this day.

A possible "tag" would be "pillory". Strangely, I find the images in the search correctly, but the "tag" does not exist in any list (neither tags nor wiki). I know bad example. These summaries also make the search harder, since the "tag" is probably no longer sought alone, but only the collective term.

Better example X-ray, now you can find 2 pictures and these do not match the old meaning. Before the change, there were believe a few hundred.

4 pictures. 9 of them were either the image itself being the poster or krystal actually depicted in a setting that just happened to also have a poster. So 9 were actually perfectly fine.

As for your other examples...

No results depicting her on a bed cover other than her literally being on one. I checked bedsheet as well to be sure. Nothing. No results for t-shirts. She is a videogame character so that's a given. 2 results for figure or figurine With none repeating that's 6 total false positives out of 4450. No results of Krystal on TV except one that is just a comic that switches to someone watching her for one panel but is otherwise the real thing. Still 6. Only one with a monitor has renamon on it, and krystal is depicted as the real thing. As for diapers. Wouldn't know. I blacklisted diaper -rating:s.

Everything combined was 6 false positive out of 4450.

And my post with "that's why included a search combination with two tags that would eliminate every example that could possibly be a poster of krystal by eliminating any pictures of krystal that contain any posters of anything, and even that only bumps the error rate to 0.2% roughly.

If it goes by a different tag later, using the old tag will give you what you want anyway. Aliasing a tag away causes the old tag to be usable anyway, even if it gets turned into a different one.

I've lost insight into the tagging system, personally. I'd have complained before, but it is still working for me as a user. It's just as a tagger that I'm uncertain.
So yay for meta threads, which might get me tagging again.

31h253 said:
I've lost insight into the tagging system, personally. I'd have complained before, but it is still working for me as a user. It's just as a tagger that I'm uncertain.
So yay for meta threads, which might get me tagging again.

On another meta level, your interest in it directly improves its usefulness. That's one more person powering the tags, giving it something that makes AI obsolete. Us.

kamimatsu said:
On another meta level, your interest in it directly improves its usefulness. That's one more person powering the tags, giving it something that makes AI obsolete. Us.

Actually, when more accurate tagging is done in advance, it becomes easier for dumb AI (machine learning) to come in later and make humans obsolete.

If there are 2 million mostly well-tagged posts on e621, that's a lot better for the AI than a messy dataset with just 50,000 posts. It's training data. The more you have and the more accurate it is, the better the AI becomes at automatically tagging.

We have almost a thousand images tagged with panties_around_one_leg. If there were only twenty images tagged with that, algorithms might not be able to recognize the pattern and tag it correctly. But with a thousand or more, it could "learn" enough to instantly recognize panties around one leg. It could even look through the existing thousand and determine that some of them were probably tagged incorrectly.

So please do power the tags, with the expectation that if e621 still exists in a decade or two, we *could* tag with bots.

Lance_Armstrong said:
Actually, when more accurate tagging is done in advance, it becomes easier for dumb AI (machine learning) to come in later and make humans obsolete.

If there are 2 million mostly well-tagged posts on e621, that's a lot better for the AI than a messy dataset with just 50,000 posts. It's training data. The more you have and the more accurate it is, the better the AI becomes at automatically tagging.

We have almost a thousand images tagged with panties_around_one_leg. If there were only twenty images tagged with that, algorithms might not be able to recognize the pattern and tag it correctly. But with a thousand or more, it could "learn" enough to instantly recognize panties around one leg. It could even look through the existing thousand and determine that some of them were probably tagged incorrectly.

So please do power the tags, with the expectation that if e621 still exists in a decade or two, we *could* tag with bots.

But bots can only correct errors if the error isn't the error correction itself. Any bug one version has would be in anything it makes. That is why you never make volatile source code. We don't want an automated GameManiac. Humans have no such limitations as long as there are multiple and no mob mentality forms. There are multiple, and none has.

kamimatsu said:
If it goes by a different tag later, using the old tag will give you what you want anyway. Aliasing a tag away causes the old tag to be usable anyway, even if it gets turned into a different one.

The old names, after merging "tags" do not always work I have proven to you. If it should be so, then tell me how I find x-ray images such: ID: 1307912. Small note, the new 2 word search combination is useless. This combination lists everything from x-ray to internal. How can it be that the pillory does not even exist, even though the search finds the pictures?

kamimatsu said:
Everything combined was 6 false positive out of 4450.

I am impressed. You make the effort and search individually each picture and the 10,000 pictures. I should feel honored. I do not know what you have with Krystal, I said, that was an example. But we'll stay with her. Krystal + plushie = 9 hits (3 positive + 3x Fox McCloud). Anyway, end with the theme, non-existent figures. I said that there are users who do not want to have something when they are looking but want what they are looking for. It may be that the amount of pictures on which it applies is relatively low, but with other details in the past, no one has disturbed and changed it.

Finally, a few examples:
ID: 787231 - too much to enumerate
ID: 1090029 - Here I am not even sure if the main character can be called Krystal (Fox Plushie).
ID: 1116573 - pokemon plushie, MLP Poster

I explained my point of view and made a compromise proposal. I have no desire to constantly explain things 3 times because users like you can not accept it is something as it is.

Lance_Armstrong said:
So please do power the tags, with the expectation that if e621 still exists in a decade or two, we *could* tag with bots.

We do not have to. It would already be enough if all the rules here were adhered to. Above all, we need fixed and simple rules on e621 in terms of tags and their depth of detail. Even the best bot can not process permanent changes in the tags, alias and their detail depth. I wonder how one can say with over 1 million pictures, which is a "tag" with a few hundred pictures, this number is too little, this "tag" deserves to be independent.

remigius said:
Pretty horrible and wrong example since you are thinking of x_ray (13284 posts), not x-ray.

You are complaining about aliasing synonyms or spelling variants even though you could not find the x_ray posts because you were using the wrong term.

See how helpful this can be?

Wrong: https://e621.net/wiki/show?title=pillory

If pillory still exists, why is the "tag" then out of the list?

What your argument to x_ray concerns may be that it was misspelled, nevertheless does not change anything. What you show me is not what I mean. What you show is the merging, what I get in the search when I use the new search formula. I mean these images ID: 1307912 and similar, no internal. Before the change you have these with the "tag" x_ray found, as far as I remember.

If I may, a couple of thoughts:

I believe a good solution for this could be to expand the current tagging system to be able to differentiate between "Primary" and "Secondary" tags on an image. This would essentially allow users to prioritise tags according to their relevance to the rest of the post's content, in theory preventing cases like the OP stated, as well as those where an object is only a background detail. e.g. a dildo packed on a shelf isn't necessarily what the person searching this tag had in mind.

Also, a few people mentioned clutter in the tagging sidebar. I'd just like to say that this could also be easily remedied by having nested tags, essentially hiding implicated tags from the default post view.

CheckUp said:
If I may, a couple of thoughts:

I believe a good solution for this could be to expand the current tagging system to be able to differentiate between "Primary" and "Secondary" tags on an image. This would essentially allow users to prioritise tags according to their relevance to the rest of the post's content, in theory preventing cases like the OP stated, as well as those where an object is only a background detail. e.g. a dildo packed on a shelf isn't necessarily what the person searching this tag had in mind.

But then we come again to the territory of subjectivity. Who decides what is primary or secondary and who enforces that? Of course there are clear cases, but majority wukk still be under subjective choise. Is dildo on bed be secondary feature to one in use? And how about wall full of dildoes in the background?

PlüschTiger said:
If pillory still exists, why is the "tag" then out of the list?

Because it was aliased to stocks. Aliasing treats both the old tag and the new one as the same thing, only showing the new. If you search pillory, you will get the same results as stocks. In fact those links are the results. They are identical because aliasing doesn't remove an aliased tag. It treats it as whatever it was aliased to. You are thinking of tag invalidation, which is ironically the very thing you are suggesting.

@Mario69 I'm pretty sure there is not a single tag for "wall_of_dildos" atm... :P

Well, my suggestion was formed under the assumption that most people know what they're looking for. Coming back to the dildo example, I presume users who search the tag want to see the toy in-use or standing ready to be used instead of just a small irrelevant detail on the shelf. Like the OP stated, "pictures tagged with a certain character or creature that's always in a really tiny picture in the background or a tattoo or something you wouldn't even notice" is objectively not something that person wanted when they entered the inquiry. Seems to me that, since it's the users tagging these images anyway, those who look for specific terms would know best if something is or isn't important for the tag they searched. Considering the main rule of "tag what you see" is still a priority I reckon an additional filter would only enhance already existing results by weeding out "undesirable" uses of the tag (such as background Easter-eggs). In the end it would be an optional system anyway, and there would be no limits on which tag is what priority since it would vary from image to image, so I'm leaning towards the conclusion that enforcing anything shouldn't even be a concern.

To me it feels like the benefits outweigh the cons, but I don't reject the possibility that I could be entirely wrong here. There are, after all, many ways the search system can be changed to achieve the desired results, however none of them would be very objective imho. Personally though I'd be much more interested in the nested tags suggestion... and perhaps a way to quickly edit tags while browsing using the Imagus browser add-on. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

CheckUp said:
@Mario69 I'm pretty sure there is not a single tag for "wall_of_dildos" atm... :P

Well, my suggestion was formed under the assumption that most people know what they're looking for. Coming back to the dildo example, I presume users who search the tag want to see the toy in-use or standing ready to be used instead of just a small irrelevant detail on the shelf. Like the OP stated, "pictures tagged with a certain character or creature that's always in a really tiny picture in the background or a tattoo or something you wouldn't even notice" is objectively not something that person wanted when they entered the inquiry. Seems to me that, since it's the users tagging these images anyway, those who look for specific terms would know best if something is or isn't important for the tag they searched. Considering the main rule of "tag what you see" is still a priority I reckon an additional filter would only enhance already existing results by weeding out "undesirable" uses of the tag (such as background Easter-eggs). In the end it would be an optional system anyway, and there would be no limits on which tag is what priority since it would vary from image to image, so I'm leaning towards the conclusion that enforcing anything shouldn't even be a concern.

To me it feels like the benefits outweigh the cons, but I don't reject the possibility that I could be entirely wrong here. There are, after all, many ways the search system can be changed to achieve the desired results, however none of them would be very objective imho. Personally though I'd be much more interested in the nested tags suggestion... and perhaps a way to quickly edit tags while browsing using the Imagus browser add-on. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

That's your assumption of what majority will look for and most likely this is not the case and even if it was, how large portion of the userbase is that majority and will it cause issues for everyone?

No, it would not "weed out undesireable uses for the tag", it will only make searching harder when you cannot read the mind whoever tagged the thing that did they consider it primary feature on the image or not. If the primary feature was that dildo was in use, then how about if the character was holding the dildo on plate? What if they are thinking it and it's inside thinking bubble, meaning it doesn't even exsist on post? What if it is in use but you cannot see it almost at all? And what I meant with wall was that if there's huge amount of dildos but they are all background, is it still just background and thus less important? There's absurd amount of variables to be determined and this has been only discussing about single tag thus far.

And why enforcing wouldn't be concern? Even now we just got tag locking in place because there are users fighting over objective issues already. Now think about when now on top of that admins have to solve subjective issues and as they are subjective, even admins can have differend views on the matter. And this hasn't even mentioned the amount of work it requires to implement the feature in the first place.

I still see zero benefit and absurd amount of fighting and extra work. We already have posts constantly wrongly tagged, undertagged, unsourced, etc. so I would first worry about those before implementing yet another thing that the famous majority of users missuse and disregard.

Mario69 said:
But then we come again to the territory of subjectivity. Who decides what is primary or secondary and who enforces that? Of course there are clear cases, but majority wukk still be under subjective choise. Is dildo on bed be secondary feature to one in use? And how about wall full of dildoes in the background?

That's right. However, this is already so. At many "tags" it is more individual assessment than rule, (even with rules). Nobody thinks the same way and appreciates things differently, so it is called individuality.

The problem you are addressing is the reason why I have restricted myself to figures on posters and the like. With these things it is relatively simple and it would be necessary only a small change at very many different "tags".

I remember the system of soffury. Officials and unofficial "tags", unofficial are all those who do not belong to the official tag tree. Admittedly, this is not an ideal solution for the detail tag.

CheckUp said:
Seems to me that, since it's the users tagging these images anyway, those who look for specific terms would know best if something is or isn't important for the tag they searched

You said it. The user who is looking for, decides what is relevant and what is not. Surely we will not be able to get a perfect system and even if we establish something there will always be weak spots, but we will be able to live as a user or close them.

Mario69 said:
We already have posts constantly wrongly tagged, undertagged, unsourced, etc. so

You're damn right! But who is the one who caused it? To those include also users who have a rank here, even the one or other Admin do not make an improvement if he is on a picture where only extremely few "tags" are. I have already seen pictures where admins and other rank were carriers and have not changed more than 1 "tag". If then a "Janitor or Contributor" when uploading the images not even the most necessary open "tags" integrated, how is the problem better? I have a few months since the upload volume enormously increased and often only pictures are replaced, which suspects that some users only around mass and thus rewards in the form of a green pennant from the admins goes. Unfortunately, the fact that some pictures later replaced again suspects. Why do not they just upload the best version? Rather, I have as a user when fewer images are uploaded as tons and these badly described. Users who have no idea of ​​using the "tags" I do not blame.

kamimatsu said:
Because it was aliased to stocks. Aliasing treats both the old tag and the new one as the same thing, only showing the new. If you search pillory, you will get the same results as stocks. In fact those links are the results. They are identical because aliasing doesn't remove an aliased tag. It treats it as whatever it was aliased to. You are thinking of tag invalidation, which is ironically the very thing you are suggesting.

This is again a miscellany of different and false things. In addition, I ask times: Why e621 introduces an upper term and neither to the upper term, nor to the alias "tags" there are also only 1 letter in the wiki? 0. Nothing! And no, I'm not about alias. What has ID:1282297 to do with pillory?

NotMeNotYou said:
False positives are an inherent flaw in every classification and search system. Your proposals so far would mean the number of tags required to be remembered by users explode. For example we'd need Krystal, Krystal_(Paraphernalia), Krystal_(Background), now replicate this for every popular character in existence. However, how is this supposed to work with things like birds? Do we have bird_(background) as well? Do we do this for every species? What about a cup being held by a person in the foreground vs a cup standing on a table in the background?

Some less relevant results are required to keep the tags usable, and manageable. We already have a steep learning curve and we really don't need to increase that learning curve further because some people don't feel like opening a wrong image once or twice in their search.
Further we're talking here about "less relevant" results, not "wrong" results, opening an image every now and then that's not exactly what someone has been looking for isn't the end of the world.

Not correct! You speak my language and does not even have the courtesy to answer me in this as well. This argument with Krystal has nothing to do with what I said. If then 1 "tag" addition would be necessary for all "characters", "copyrights" variants. I am talking about a collective term for characters that do not exist as real figures. Since Ratte has denied a deletion of details already at the beginning. I limit myself to a part of the extravagant details. What your talking about wrong results, which I speak of what brings the combination inevitably brings along. It is a secondary detail and if one finds it in the search it is a wrong find, not separable.

If you want to argue now, this is a English page, so English is spoken, look in your profile. Now you should also be clear why your behavior so annoyed me.

PlüschTiger said:
Not correct! You speak my language and does not even have the courtesy to answer me in this as well. This argument with Krystal has nothing to do with what I said. If then 1 "tag" addition would be necessary for all "characters", "copyrights" variants. I am talking about a collective term for characters that do not exist as real figures. Since Ratte has denied a deletion of details already at the beginning. I limit myself to a part of the extravagant details. What your talking about wrong results, which I speak of what brings the combination inevitably brings along. It is a secondary detail and if one finds it in the search it is a wrong find, not separable.

German - Deutsch

Falsch! Du sprichst meine Sprache und besitzt nicht mal die Höflichkeit mir in dieser ebenfalls zu antworten. Diese Argumentation mit Krystal hat nichts mit dem zu tun was ich sagte. Wenn dann wäre 1 "tag" Zusatz für alle "characters", "Copyrights" Varianten nötig. Ich rede von einem Sammelbegriff für Charaktere, welche nicht als reale Figur existieren. Da Ratte eine Weglassung von Details bereits am Anfang verneint hat. Ich beschränke mich auf einen Teil der nebensächlichen Details. Was dein reden von falschen Resultaten angeht, das wovon ich spreche bringt die Kombination zwangsläufig mit. Es ist ein nebensächliches Detail und wenn man es in der suche findet ist es ein falscher Fund, nicht trennbar.

I answer in english because I want all of my replies to be understood by the largest common denominator. I am under no obligation to write everything twice just because you have trouble understanding it.

As for your actual arguments, still doubles nearly half of our tags for very little gain. Also, a false positive is one that is completely wrong for the search used. If you're looking for a character, and then find a different character holding a photo of the first one then that is not a false positive. You have found the first character, just not in a way you expected. The entire problem you think there is can simply be solved by accepting that sometimes the results might contain things you didn't expect but are still technically correct.

But just for you, a google translation will be appended.

PlüschTiger said:
If you want to argue now, this is a English page, so English is spoken, look in your profile. Now you should also be clear why your behavior so annoyed me.

Deutsch

Falls du jetzt Argumentieren willst, das ist eine Englische Seite, also wird englisch gesprochen, siehe mal in dein Profil. Jetzt sollte dir auch klar sein weshalb mich dein Verhalten so verärgert.

What I do on my own profile is my own decision. I offer German to users in a private setting, on my own terms, because they might be more comfortable with that language than they are with English. If you can't wrap your head around the fact that staff has an official public language, but still offers a secondary language at their own leisure in private, then that is your own problem.

NotMeNotYou said:
I answer in english because I want all of my replies to be understood by the largest common denominator. I am under no obligation to write everything twice just because you have trouble understanding it.

But just for you, a google translation will be appended.

Deutsch

Ich antworte auf Englisch, weil ich alle meine Antworten von dem größten gemeinsamen Nenner verstanden werden möchte. Ich bin nicht verpflichtet, alles zweimal zu schreiben, nur weil du Schwierigkeiten hast, es zu verstehen.

Your argument of the side-language and the like is for me an pretext. You know that I am German, just like you and then you have now also the irreverence to me a Google translation of your answer. This can hardly be surpassed in impertinence. No, this is not the same thing I do if you want to get the argument. I am a German on an English website and communicate (with help) in their language, instead of my own. You can use my language and give me a translation. You know that I was only a German (section) with your answer, as I did it and you also found good. Even if you are not committed to it, you do not have to react with such impertinence, certainly not as an admin. Then we come to the second:

NotMeNotYou said:

What I do on my own profile is my own decision. I offer German to users in a private setting, on my own terms, because they might be more comfortable with that language than they are with English. If you can't wrap your head around the fact that staff has an official public language, but still offers a secondary language at their own leisure in private, then that is your own problem.

Deutsch

Was ich in meinem eigenen Profil mache, ist meine eigene Entscheidung. Ich biete Deutschen den Benutzern in einer privaten Umgebung zu meinen eigenen Bedingungen an, weil sie mit dieser Sprache bequemer sein könnten als mit Englisch. Wenn Sie Ihren Kopf nicht um die Tatsache wickeln können, dass das Personal eine offizielle öffentliche Sprache hat, aber immer noch eine Sekundärsprache in ihrer eigenen Freizeit privat anbietet, dann ist das dein eigenes Problem.

This is wrong and you know. You are admin, even admin and thus the face of the site. Not for nothing, you have made your profile serious, instead of writing garbage. From what you offer, not even the official I have hardly noticed anything.

PlüschTiger said:

Your argument of the side-language and the like is for me an pretext. You know that I am German, just like you and then you have now also the irreverence to me a Google translation of your answer. This can hardly be surpassed in impertinence. No, this is not the same thing I do if you want to get the argument. I am a German on an English website and communicate (with help) in their language, instead of my own. You can use my language and give me a translation. You know that I was only a German (section) with your answer, as I did it and you also found good. Even if you are not committed to it, you do not have to react with such impertinence, certainly not as an admin. Then we come to the second:

German Deutsch

Dein Argument der Seitensprache und dergleichen ist für mich eine Ausrede. Du weißt das ich deutscher bin, genau wie du und dann hast du jetzt auch noch die Respektlosigkeit mir eine Google Übersetzung deiner Antwort vorzusetzen. Das ist an Frechheit kaum mehr zu übertreffen. Nein, das ist nicht das selbe was ich mache, falls du mit dem Argument kommen willst. Ich bin Deutscher auf einer Englischen Internetseite und kommuniziere (mit Hilfe) in deren Sprache, statt meiner eigenen. Du kannst meine Sprache und gibst mir eine Übersetzung. Du weißt das es mir lediglich um eine Deutsche (section) bei deiner Antwort ging, so wie ich es mache und du auch gut fandest. Selbst wenn du nicht dazu verpflichtet bist, musst du nicht mit solchen Unverschämtheiten reagieren, schon gar nicht als Admin. Da kommen wir zum zweiten:

This is wrong and you know. You are admin, even admin and thus the face of the site. Not for nothing, you have made your profile serious, instead of writing garbage. From what you offer, not even the official I have hardly noticed anything.

German - Deutsch

Das ist Falsch und das weißt du. Du bist Admin, sogar Leitender Admin und somit das Gesicht der Seite. Nicht umsonst hast du dein Profil seriös gestaltet, statt Müll zu schreiben. Von dem was du anbietest, nicht mal den offiziellen habe ich kaum etwas gemerkt.

post #889033

PlüschTiger said:
Your argument of the side-language and the like is for me an pretext. You know that I am German, just like you and then you have now also the irreverence to me a Google translation of your answer. This can hardly be surpassed in impertinence. No, this is not the same thing I do if you want to get the argument. I am a German on an English website and communicate (with help) in their language, instead of my own. You can use my language and give me a translation. You know that I was only a German (section) with your answer, as I did it and you also found good. Even if you are not committed to it, you do not have to react with such impertinence, certainly not as an admin.

Koska käytät jotain saatanan konekääntäjää, niin sun teksteistä ei ole saanut melkein yhtään mitään selvää tai joutunut lukemaan niin moneen kertaan etten oo jaksanut edes vaivautua ymmärtämäään tai vastaamaan niihin. En vieläkään saa selvää mitä ensimmäinen lause pitäisi tarkoittaa. Jotain sivukielestä ja verukkeesta.

Tiedän, että tällä sivustolla on useampi käyttäjä joka osaa puhua ja ymmärtää suomea, mutta se ei tarkoita että heillä olisi minkäänlaista vastuuta auttaa kääntämään tekstiä. Kukaan ei kiellä kirjoittamasta sinua saksaksi, mutta ihan samalla tavalla kukaan ei ole pakotettu ymmärtämään saksaa. Sivusto on saatavilla vain englanniksi, sijaitsee englantia puhuvassa maassa ja suurin osa käyttäjistä puhuu sujuvaa englantia, joten en keskustelisi englannin kieleen perustuvasta luokittelusysteemistä saksaksi ja sitten konekäännä sitä.

Vaikka konekääntäjät, varsinkin googlen, on pikkuhiljaa muuttunut käyttökelpoisemmaksi, kääntää se edelleen paljon virheellisesti tai järjen vastaiseksi. Voin vannoa että ekan lauseen "saatanan" muuttuu muotoon "satanic" englanniksi kääntäessä joka ei ole oikein.

PlüschTiger said:
Your argument of the side-language and the like is for me an pretext. You know that I am German, just like you and then you have now also the irreverence to me a Google translation of your answer. This can hardly be surpassed in impertinence. No, this is not the same thing I do if you want to get the argument. I am a German on an English website and communicate (with help) in their language, instead of my own. You can use my language and give me a translation. You know that I was only a German (section) with your answer, as I did it and you also found good. Even if you are not committed to it, you do not have to react with such impertinence, certainly not as an admin. Then we come to the second:

German Deutsch

Dein Argument der Seitensprache und dergleichen ist für mich eine Ausrede. Du weißt das ich deutscher bin, genau wie du und dann hast du jetzt auch noch die Respektlosigkeit mir eine Google Übersetzung deiner Antwort vorzusetzen. Das ist an Frechheit kaum mehr zu übertreffen. Nein, das ist nicht das selbe was ich mache, falls du mit dem Argument kommen willst. Ich bin Deutscher auf einer Englischen Internetseite und kommuniziere (mit Hilfe) in deren Sprache, statt meiner eigenen. Du kannst meine Sprache und gibst mir eine Übersetzung. Du weißt das es mir lediglich um eine Deutsche (section) bei deiner Antwort ging, so wie ich es mache und du auch gut fandest. Selbst wenn du nicht dazu verpflichtet bist, musst du nicht mit solchen Unverschämtheiten reagieren, schon gar nicht als Admin. Da kommen wir zum zweiten:

This is wrong and you know. You are admin, even admin and thus the face of the site. Not for nothing, you have made your profile serious, instead of writing garbage. From what you offer, not even the official I have hardly noticed anything.

German - Deutsch

Das ist Falsch und das weißt du. Du bist Admin, sogar Leitender Admin und somit das Gesicht der Seite. Nicht umsonst hast du dein Profil seriös gestaltet, statt Müll zu schreiben. Von dem was du anbietest, nicht mal den offiziellen habe ich kaum etwas gemerkt.

I would advise that any farther discussion solely about language be continued in PM, the thread is not about site language.

Topic.

NotMeNotYou said:
As for your actual arguments, still doubles nearly half of our tags for very little gain. Also, a false positive is one that is completely wrong for the search used. If you're looking for a character, and then find a different character holding a photo of the first one then that is not a false positive. You have found the first character, just not in a way you expected. The entire problem you think there is can simply be solved by accepting that sometimes the results might contain things you didn't expect but are still technically correct.

Your argument (half of the tags) would presuppose that there are millions of different characters and copyright tags on e621 and that is not the case. e621 has just over one million pictures.

I have to accept it because it is still as it is. But if you have not noticed, this threat is there to disskut about that. For more, no more, since Ratte has already said no. So I do not have to accept anything at all. Unless ........

Since e621 wants details, my suggestion is also in the sense of the rules and I have made my suggestions. It may be relatively few pictures, but in the past there was no reason to do this. As I said, just a shortcut behind the character or copyright tag and that was it. By the way i am not the only one who thinks so. Goodbye theme.

PS: That is written with Google, the upper part (section), mostly without.

PlüschTiger said:

Your argument (half of the tags) would presuppose that there are millions of different characters and copyright tags on e621 and that is not the case. e621 has just over one million pictures.

Adding merely hundreds of tags would be cause for serious concern. In reality, we currently have approximately 81900 tags that are of either Artist or Character type.

Supposing that we take 5% of that figure as the number of tags we can expect your proposal to eventually create. I propose this because, we certainly cannot expect every single artist/copyright to actually show up in background elements. 5% of 81900 is 4095.

The figure 81900 comes from
examining this search and this search ; each page contains 50 items. The search for copyright tags contains about 165 pages; (165 * 50) = 8250 items. The search for artist tags contains about 1473 pages (1473 * 50) = 73650.

8250 + 73650 = 81900.

Whether you think the "5%" figure I used is appropriate, is another question. I think it should be clear at least that this percentage must increase as the total number of posts on e621 increases. (ie. the chances of at least one post requiring any given hypothetical tag must increase as the number of posts increase)

PlüschTiger said:
This is again a miscellany of different and false things. In addition, I ask times: Why e621 introduces an upper term and neither to the upper term, nor to the alias "tags" there are also only 1 letter in the wiki? 0. Nothing! And no, I'm not about alias. What has ID:1282297 to do with pillory?

That's a typo. They clearly meant to type "socks" which would have aliased to sock. And it's a typo I'm about to correct.