Aliasing boob_freckles_and_breast_freckles → freckles_on_breast
Link to alias

Reason:

For the sake of convenience for people that like this.

You can only make one alias/implication per thread; instead of including "and", just edit in any other aliases or implications you have. Reason being you literally suggested "boob_freckles_and_breast_freckles", instead of "boob_freckles" and "breast_freckles".

i think that freckled breasts or breast freckles is best option. freckles on breasts sounds really awkward

Ledian said:
i think that freckled breasts or breast freckles is best option. freckles on breasts sounds really awkward

I like breast_freckles personally.

I'd go with freckled_breasts. You're describing breasts with freckles on them, not freckles that are on breasts.

BlueDingo said:
I'd go with freckled_breasts. You're describing breasts with freckles on them, not freckles that are on breasts.

You basically just said "you're describing a train painted red, not the red paint on a train"

Does it matter? How high are you right now?

Dyrone said:
You basically just said "you're describing a train painted red, not the red paint on a train"

Does it matter? How high are you right now?

... yes, it does matter. "What are you looking for: freckles, or breasts?", "what qualifies as freckles or what qualifies as breasts if you are focusing on only the other listed?", "which term should be the descriptor and which should be what it applies to, freckles or breasts?".

Or: what would people that aren't us look for, when looking for an image possessing freckles on breasts / breasts with freckles; would a user that isn't us tag images possessing freckles on breasts / breasts with freckles with a focus on one of those two details, or the other; should the definer be breasts or freckles, with the other being the defined.

Or, let's try to use precognition and make a tag that the general user would accept, over making an alias to a less popular one. Alternatively, we can keep organization in the wording of describing tags, like *penis* ending with penis, so the impressions given by similar tags is more intuitive by association.

Long story short: we choose a particular name so people can rely on the other tags to tell them what to do, or make it obvious enough for them to know what to do. It's the magic of psychology.

Dyrone said:
You basically just said "you're describing a train painted red, not the red paint on a train"

Same result, different focus. freckled_breasts describes a type of breast, breast_freckles describes a type of freckle.

It's the same reason why we use the tag striped_tail over tail_stripes.

Dyrone said:
Does it matter? How high are you right now?

About 5 metres.

BlueDingo said:
I'd go with freckled_breasts. You're describing breasts with freckles on them, not freckles that are on breasts.

+1 to this, explained why (in excrutiating length) in previous post.

BlueDingo said:
Same result, different focus. freckled_breasts describes a type of breast, breast_freckles describes a type of freckle.

Ok...you just repeated what you said before, but you haven't explained exactly why that's important. Who cares if we're directly referencing the freckles or the breasts? The information conveyed is the same...which is why I thought it would come down to a stylistic preference, and it seems that in that case x-body-part_freckles seems to be the norm: shoulder_freckles butt_freckles pussy_freckles etc.

Siral_Exan said:
let's try to use precognition and make a tag that the general user would accept, over making an alias to

It seems general users prefer x_freckles over freckled_x...

here is freckles
here is freckled

Here's how frequently both words are used on Reddit

So if that's your argument it's pretty poor in this case.

Dyrone said:
Ok...you just repeated what you said before, but you haven't explained exactly why that's important. Who cares if we're directly referencing the freckles or the breasts? The information conveyed is the same...which is why I thought it would come down to a stylistic preference, and it seems that in that case x-body-part_freckles seems to be the norm: shoulder_freckles butt_freckles pussy_freckles etc.

It seems general users prefer x_freckles over freckled_x...probably because the term freckled is just...weird. So if that's your argument it's pretty poor in this case.

Says the person who doesn't recognize what the site norm is, or how to judge it. I'll leave you a cryptic hint: quantity, and quality. Your list is missing both.

Siral_Exan said:
Says the person who doesn't recognize what the site norm is, or how to judge it. I'll leave you a cryptic hint: quantity, and quality. Your list is missing both.

It's still much bigger than the list for "freckled"...which is virtually non-existant.

Dyrone said:
Ok...you just repeated what you said before, but you haven't explained exactly why that's important.

Because we do it that way for all other patterns, blemishes, etc. on body parts. Why make an exception for freckles?

BlueDingo said:
Because we do it for all other patterns, blemishes, etc. on body parts. Why make an exception for freckles?

Because it's more natural linguistically.

Dyrone said:
It's still much bigger than the list for "freckled"...which is virtually non-existant.

"Much" bigger. Once you start listing tags above double digits, then you can start talking. You've only proven that neither are currently popular.

Siral_Exan said:
"Much" bigger. Once you start listing tags above double digits, then you can start talking. You've only proven that neither are currently popular.

The fact that "freckled_x" has never occurred naturally speaks for itself. if there was even 5 tags featuring such a structure you might have a case there.

Dyrone said:
The fact that "freckled_x" has never occurred naturally speaks for itself. if there was even 5 tags featuring such a structure you might have a case there.

And you're making less of a case repeating yourself. Both me and BlueDingo's point easily dwarfs your suggestion in quantity, and you haven't even tried grasping the quality part of my statement. Even if you did have the numbers, you're missing part of what makes tags "normal".

Siral_Exan said:
And you're making less of a case repeating yourself. Both me and BlueDingo's point easily dwarfs your suggestion in quantity, and you haven't even tried grasping the quality part of my statement. Even if you did have the numbers, you're missing part of what makes tags "normal".

Saying something lacks quality simply because it doesn't suit a convention that you've artificially constructed is ridiculous. That's like saying a fish lacks quality because it can't run on land.

If you want to talk about repeating oneself it seems you are incapable of doing anything other than beating the same drum. You say something is "normal" as if we can NEVER deviate from it. I prefer to take things on a case-by-case basis and not be a slave to convention. Why force the tag into an awkward and unnatural position in order to suit convention? Sure the sample size is small, but it's really the only evidence we have as to how people prefer to write the tags, so it would be foolish to dismiss it.

Dyrone said:
Saying something lacks quality simply because it doesn't suit a convention that you've artificially constructed is ridiculous. That's like saying a fish lacks quality because it can't run on land.

Artificially constructed? Almost all tags describing body parts are in an adjective_noun format. I see no reason why this one should defy that format.

Dyrone said:
Why force the tag into an awkward and unnatural position in order to suit convention?

How exactly is it unnatural when it makes perfect sense? The word freckled means "covered in freckles", and that's what the tag is describing: breasts covered in freckles. Just like striped_tail describes a tail covered in stripes, blue_eyes describes eyes that are blue, etc.

Dyrone said:
Saying something lacks quality simply because it doesn't suit a convention that you've artificially constructed is ridiculous. That's like saying a fish lacks quality because it can't run on land.

If you want to talk about repeating oneself it seems you are incapable of doing anything other than beating the same drum. You say something is "normal" as if we can NEVER deviate from it. I prefer to take things on a case-by-case basis and not be a slave to convention. Why force the tag into an awkward and unnatural position in order to suit convention? Sure the sample size is small, but it's really the only evidence we have as to how people prefer to write the tags, so it would be foolish to dismiss it.

You missed "quality", so I'll give you a hint: it involves the question mark you can click on.

"Deviation from normal" seems to be your life story, how about you stop injecting your opinions and start facing the facts: there are very clear examples that have been made and need to be made. This site, after all, has rules that need to be followed, including its own tags. Yes, tags can break the rules, most easily said that they are wrong (certain rules make examples of this, so start looking).

This being said, there are times when tags are benign, like right now. It's easier to handle these, as they usually just get the Occam's Razor and just alias into correct tags. But, these still can harm the site and the users, should an alias not be made. Then, arguments like these occur, and people foolishly fight a losing battle, wasting time and effort against an inevitability.

But you're going to continue to argue against your veterans, aren't you? We've seen this shit, been in your shoes, and learned where the stances lie: going against the site standards ends in tragedy, and following the site standards makes more progress in reality. Are you against such progress?