Restarting the thread which had kinda wandered away from my original intentions and has gotten too big to be practical anyway.

There's been talk about it before but no action as far as I can tell, so I took it upon myself (worse come to worse it'll be renamed) to create half-human for characters such as most common classical centaurs, mermaids or satyrs that have a clear break between a human or animal humanoid half and a furry half. Doesn't have to be the top half eitehr. It's just the most common case.

post #1117671 post #982776 post #1091662

Not intended for:
* transformations stuff
* fully scaly/furry characters (e.g. most nagas)
* imps/demons

I just created a bycocket tag after stumbling across robin_hood_hat and tried to figure out what Robin Hood's hat was actually called.

Wiki created, partially populated, tag_group:clothes updated, implication pending.

Circeus said:
There's been talk about it before but no action as far as I can tell, so I took it upon myself (worse come to worse it'll be renamed) to create half-human for characters such as most common classical centaurs, mermaids or satyrs that have a clear break between a human or animal humanoid half and a furry half. Doesn't have to be the top half eitehr. It's just the most common case.

Sounds good to me. Easy to identify, tag name is intuitive enough. How are we going to handle the implications? Some will be easy (eg. centaurs are always half human) but some won't (eg. mermaids aren't so much).

Created an expression_meme tag for images created through suggestions prompted by artists posting expression sheets like this.

Circeus said:
There's been talk about it before but no action as far as I can tell, so I took it upon myself (worse come to worse it'll be renamed) to create half-human for characters such as most common classical centaurs, mermaids or satyrs that have a clear break between a human or animal humanoid half and a furry half. Doesn't have to be the top half eitehr. It's just the most common case.

post #1117671 post #982776 post #1091662

Those clearly belong under animal_humanoid, so if this tag is added it should probably be a subtag of that.

Genjar said:
Those clearly belong under animal_humanoid, so if this tag is added it should probably be a subtag of that.

What about centaurs? They would fall under this proposed tag yet are not animal humanoids.

This would be more of a side category as some things don't fall into the same category as the others. Centaurs are taurs, satyrs are animal humanoids and lamias are... nothing, apparently.

BlueDingo said:
What about centaurs? They would fall under this proposed tag yet are not animal humanoids.

Good point. Taur is a separate category.
...and what about centaurs that don't look half-human? There's some that look half-elven, etc.

Strictly speaking, those satyrs don't have much in common with what we tag as human either. Since even the 'human' half has features that makes it non-human by our standards. Non-human ears, etc.

Genjar said:
Good point. Taur is a separate category.
...and what about centaurs that don't look half-human? There's some that look half-elven, etc.

Strictly speaking, those satyrs don't have much in common with what we tag as human either. Since even the 'human' half has features that makes it non-human by our standards. Pointy ears, etc.

True. In many cases, they would be half-humanoid as opposed to half-human. It depends on where we drawn the line on "human enough". Perhaps half-humanoid would be a more accurate.

BlueDingo said:
True. In many cases, they would be half-humanoid as opposed to half-human. It depends on where we drawn the line on "human enough". Perhaps half-humanoid would be a more accurate.

What about other way around? Half-animal, to go with animal_head and other similar tags? Then we wouldn't have to worry if the non-animal half is human or humanoid.

On the other hand, that might get mixed up with hybrid.

Half-human only works if they're half human. This is why I suggested hemitaur twice before for species similar to satyrs and minotaurs.

Furrin_Gok said:
Half-human only works if they're half human. This is why I suggested hemitaur twice before for species similar to satyrs and minotaurs.

That tag is out of question because of our usage of taur. Satyrs and such are not taurs by our tagging standards. Not even minotaurs are taurs, despite the name.

Genjar said:
What about other way around? Half-animal, to go with animal_head and other similar tags? Then we wouldn't have to worry if the non-animal half is human or humanoid.

On the other hand, that might get mixed up with hybrid.

The divide between the halves should be clear enough to reduce that issue. I'd say anything without a humanoid_face and lots of exposed skin wouldn't count.

Genjar said:
That tag is out of question because of our usage of taur. Satyrs and such are not taurs by our tagging standards. Not even minotaurs are taurs, despite the name.

Are you saying the humanoid tag is out of the question because we already have the human tag? Just because the majority of the term happens to be the same word as an existing tag doesn't mean this new tag is "out of the question."
If you vote against the term, sure, that's understandable, but don't say it's an invalid idea for some nonsensical reason.

Created a wiki page for a fife (a type of flute). First time creating a wiki page, so I likely made some sort of mistake.

Furrin_Gok said:
Are you saying the humanoid tag is out of the question because we already have the human tag?

No, I'm saying that hemitaur is out of question because it has nothing to do with what we tag as taur. Satyrs and such aren't half-taur (hemi means half) by our standards.

HsTheBraixen said:
Created a wiki page for a fife (a type of flute). First time creating a wiki page, so I likely made some sort of mistake.

Looks alright to me.

BlueDingo said:
Looks alright to me.

Thank you. Based my short entry upon your's for the flute page. Always glad to have a model for something I am new at doing.

Genjar said:
No, I'm saying that hemitaur is out of question because it has nothing to do with what we tag as taur. Satyrs and such aren't half-taur (hemi means half) by our standards.

Okay, so you're saying the long_taur tag is invalid. After all, taur refers to exactly four legs and two arms, and yet these guys aren't simply really long lower-torsos between their legs, they have more than four!
If we can use a tag like that, then your excuse falls apart into irrelevancy itself. A "Long Taur" is a "taur" which has more than the four legs, and a "Hemi Taur" would be the opposite.

HsTheBraixen said:
Thank you. Based my short entry upon your's for the flute page. Always glad to have a model for something I am new at doing.

I should try creating basic templates and discussing them somewhere since I try to build my pages the same way each time and people seem to be okay with the way I do it. If I were any good at javascript, I could even try adding a button to the edit page that could load a blank template to fill in.

Furrin_Gok said:
Okay, so you're saying the long_taur tag is invalid. After all, taur refers to exactly four legs and two arms, and yet these guys aren't simply really long lower-torsos between their legs, they have more than four!

You might want to check the taur wiki again. Taurs are multi-legged, not limited to quadrupedal. So that argument is completely invalid.

Genjar said:
Good point. Taur is a separate category.
...and what about centaurs that don't look half-human? There's some that look half-elven, etc.

Most elves are little more than pointy-eared human (not even necessarily with nonhuman skin color).

The point of the tag is to have something that covers these peculiar combinations (i.e. something that cover what's common between ariel, philoctetes and fantasia centaurs), and half-human can at least do the trick while we figure something better. Heck, post #782337 is tagged with "humanoid" and there is no way to argue that's correct. I think covering the obvious cases is more important than arguing endlessly about the edge cases (which exist for countless other tags already anyway).

Example of satyr/siren/centaurs (or at least things using those tags) that are not half-human:

post #1102132 post #970746 post #819295 post #928374 post #751879 post #882173 post #1015748 (that last one should really have animal head)

FWIW I think it's more of an anatomy tag (like quadruped or long_tail) than a species tag, since no species can be implicated to it and vice-versa.

Circeus said:
The point of the tag is to have something that covers these peculiar combinations (i.e. something that cover what's common between ariel, philoctetes and fantasia centaurs), and half-human can at least do the trick while we figure something better.

We already did. Use half-animal instead.
It's not perfect, but better than half-human for reasons already mentioned.

Genjar said:
You might want to check the taur wiki again. Taurs are multi-legged, not limited to quadrupedal. So that argument is completely invalid.

No, it isn't. This just proves you're wrong in the opposite direction. If you follow "What the wiki says," Long_Taur is invalid because Taur already covers it.
Just because you don't like a tag idea doesn't mean you can say it's invalid, Genjar. We can always change up what a wiki says so that it works right.

Furrin_Gok said:
No, it isn't. This just proves you're wrong in the opposite direction. If you follow "What the wiki says," Long_Taur is invalid because Taur already covers it.

Long_taur is clearly meant to be a taur subtag instead of a separate category. The implication for it is still open in forum #205337.

And none of that has anything to do with the fact that hemitaur (half-taur) is a completely unsuitable tag for creatures that have nothing to do with taurs.

Genjar said:
Long_taur is clearly meant to be a taur subtag instead of a separate category. The implication for it is still open in forum #205337.

And none of that has anything to do with the fact that hemitaur (half-taur) is a completely unsuitable tag for creatures that have nothing to do with taurs.

How do they not? A human/anthro upper half, with half a feral lower half, fits how you would describe "Half-Taur" perfectly.

Furrin_Gok said:
How do they not? A human/anthro upper half, with half a feral lower half, fits how you would describe "Half-Taur" perfectly.

No matter how I look at it, that still makes no sense whatsoever. And you've been going on about it for almost a year now. Without anyone else supporting the idea.

Just let it go. We'd get a whole lot more work done if we didn't have to spend committee time on things like this.

Genjar said:
No matter how I look at it, that still makes no sense whatsoever. And you've been going on about it for almost a year now. Without anyone else supporting the idea.

Just let it go. We'd get a whole lot more work done if we didn't have to spend committee time on things like this.

I've brought it up a total of three times. The first time was at the end of a page and probably didn't get noticed, the second time the conversation was centered around the above and below posts, so it was likely missed there, too.

You're the one who needs to let it go, Genjar. If it doesn't make sense to you, then it doesn't make sense to you, that's all there is to that. Give other people a chance to place their opinions in here rather than trying to shut things down before then.

What if we had a tag that worked like taur but didn't have the legs requirement, ie. a tag that simple meant "half anthro/humanoid, half feral", that would cover all of these? half-human/half-animal, taur, lamia, etc. would imply it.

Things it would cover (top examples are half-human):

post #788089 post #1119831 post #924455 post #973466
post #974654 post #407195 post #918808 post #14640

In regards to long_taur which is created by me, as Genjar notes it is for the most part a subtag/subspecies of taur.

Regarding hemitaur the terminology just doesnt seem quite sound considering the only other place we use hemi~ to describe anatomy is hemipenes wich are a type of reptilian genitalia that as the shaft split in to halves that pretty much mirror each other. in that regard hemi just doesnt work as nothing is being mirrored in regards to all forms of taurs and other half-n-half creatures. "short_taur" would be much more apt but still a bit nebulous in the limits were it would apply.

And as i hinted in the above paragraph: taurs, nagas, lamia, merfolk, satyrs and all other half-feral half-anthro/human forms i would colectivly refer as half-n-half creatures. That eliminates the issue of "humans or humanoids" that other suggestions for a collective tag so far have.

Furrin_Gok said:
I've brought it up a total of three times. The first time was at the end of a page and probably didn't get noticed, the second time the conversation was centered around the above and below posts, so it was likely missed there, too.

Trust me, they get noticed. The committee already discussed this matter back when we decided what to do with the satyr tag.

BlueDingo said:
What if we had a tag that worked like taur but didn't have the legs requirement, ie. a tag that simple meant "half anthro/humanoid, half feral", that would cover all of these? half-human/half-animal, taur, lamia, etc. would imply it.

Interesting idea, but where would that leave creatures such as satyrs and minotaurs, which have half-anthro lower body instead of half-feral?

I guess we could go with something like half_and_half. Which sounds a bit odd, but might catch on.

I recall brining up a point before of moving to treat satyr as a bodytype rather than a species, then appending the species in use. A fox satyr would be tagged as both fox and satyr.

Personally it's less confusing when faun is used instead, but that's my experience.

Ratte said:
I recall brining up a point before of moving to treat satyr as a bodytype rather than a species, then appending the species in use. A fox satyr would be tagged as both fox and satyr.

Personally it's less confusing when faun is used instead, but that's my experience.

I have a feeling associating a name for a known specific species with a whole bodytype would be a rather very bad idea.

That would be like aliasing taur to centaur...

Ruku said:
I have a feeling associating a name for a known specific species with a whole bodytype would be a rather very bad idea.

That would be like aliasing taur to centaur...

I have seen this use for years and nobody's really complained.

ass_cleavage as an attempt to get a kickstart on this. Not sure why not tag has coalesced for this.

post #1122350 post #1107945 post #802838

Circeus said:
ass_cleavage as an attempt to get a kickstart on this. Not sure why not tag has coalesced for this.

Shouldn't it be butt_cleavage to line up with all the other butt tags?

Wait, that's why there's no main tag for this. butt_cleavage was aliased to butt a few years ago.

So, the classifications for "half-n-half creatures" would be something like this:

Note:

• All marked with "¹" belong to half-human.

• "A" and "B" represent distinct animal species, in such way that A ≠ B (example: if A = rat, so B ≠ rat).

e.g.

post #1091767 unnamed I

•

post #889899 satyr¹
post #146088 satyr²

•

post #1039722 taur¹
post #1080941 taur²

•

post #658641 lamia¹
post #1115916 lamia²

•

post #545282 unnamed II
post #610305 naga

•

post #451943 cecaelia¹
post #30753 cecaelia²

•

post #1111445 merfolk¹
post #878597 merfolk²

There's also full-anthro merfolk, mostly from MtG, but it's a pretty corner case thing.

O16 said:
So, the classifications for "half-n-half creatures" would be something like this:

Thanks for the list, makes it easier to see how many combos there are.
There's also ipotane (humanoid / anthro horse), plus numerous OC species. I've seen some with dinosaur legs, etc.

The upper body can be anything from human to humanoid to anthro. But the one thing they have in common is that the lower body is always that of an animal (either feral or anthro).

What it comes down to is what do we want the tag to contain? All of those half-creatures, or just half-human/humanoid ones? I think the former would be more useful, and far easier to keep sorted. Which means that we'll need to name it something like half-and-half or half-animal, the other suggestions are too specific.

Ruku said:
In regards to long_taur which is created by me, as Genjar notes it is for the most part a subtag/subspecies of taur.

Exactly. Half_taur would be the same thing: A subtag/subspecies of taur.

Regarding hemitaur the terminology just doesnt seem quite sound considering the only other place we use hemi~ to describe anatomy is hemipenes wich are a type of reptilian genitalia that as the shaft split in to halves that pretty much mirror each other. in that regard hemi just doesnt work as nothing is being mirrored in regards to all forms of taurs and other half-n-half creatures. "short_taur" would be much more apt but still a bit nebulous in the limits were it would apply.

Not sure I like "Short," but what if we layman it and just say "Half" instead of "Hemi"?

And as i hinted in the above paragraph: taurs, nagas, lamia, merfolk, satyrs and all other half-feral half-anthro/human forms i would colectivly refer as half-n-half creatures. That eliminates the issue of "humans or humanoids" that other suggestions for a collective tag so far have.

I definitely like this idea.
-

Genjar said:
Trust me, they get noticed. The committee already discussed this matter back when we decided what to do with the satyr tag.

The "committee?" This isn't "Should we tag this scenario", it's "What tag should we use". Public communication helps brainstorm better tags. I suspect that if the committee was involved, it was for a different reason.
-

Ratte said:
I recall brining up a point before of moving to treat satyr as a bodytype rather than a species, then appending the species in use. A fox satyr would be tagged as both fox and satyr.

Personally it's less confusing when faun is used instead, but that's my experience.

Faun does seem more flexible in use, but maybe we're the oddballs out :P
-

O16 said:

Name	upper-body	lower-body
unnamed II	anthro (A)	serpentiform (A)

post #545282 unnamed II

I've argued before, naga should be a body type, similar to the satyr/faun idea above. Thanks to Warcraft, "Naga" is definitely also used for fish in that body type!

Furrin_Gok said:
Exactly. Half_taur would be the same thing: A subtag/subspecies of taur.
Not sure I like "Short," but what if we layman it and just say "Half" instead of "Hemi"?

This is a taur:
post #974654

'Short_taur' version of that would be, well, anthro. As for centaurs and such, they become animal_humanoids (see ipotane). In either case, we already have tags for them.

Genjar said:
This is a taur:
post #974654

'Short_taur' would be, well, anthro.

I think we should maybe have a special tag for taurs that have the same species as the anthro bit as the species for the feral bit.

This kind of tag would not be applicable to Short/Half Taur, because part of being taur involves two separate types of things between the upper and lower body.

Furrin_Gok said:
This kind of tag would not be applicable to Short/Half Taur, because part of being taur involves two separate types of things between the upper and lower body.

Ah, I see. That's why you were going for demitaur.
But such taurs are actually a minority in furdom. See foxtaur, chakat, dragontaur, etc. All single species taurs.

We use taur as a body type tag, regardless of the species. Foxtaurs and centaurs are both taurs because of their shape.

What we lack is a tag to differentiate those two. Which is exactly why a general tag like 'half-and-half' would be useful. Not only for taurs, but for all body types.

Furrin_Gok said:
Faun does seem more flexible in use, but maybe we're the oddballs out :P

Yeah, having been in the furry thing for a while, I've seen faun used more broadly than satyr. Regardless, I've seen faun used as a bodytype rather than a species in a lot of places and on a lot of pieces. It's not unheard of in the slightest. It's bothersome how we seem to pick and choose when to be technically accurate and when not to be, but oh well.

Genjar said:
Thanks for the list, makes it easier to see how many combos there are.
There's also ipotane (humanoid / anthro horse), plus numerous OC species. I've seen some with dinosaur legs, etc.

The upper body can be anything from human to humanoid to anthro. But the one thing they have in common is that the lower body is always that of an animal (either feral or anthro).

What it comes down to is what do we want the tag to contain? All of those half-creatures, or just half-human/humanoid ones? I think the former would be more useful, and far easier to keep sorted. Which means that we'll need to name it something like half-and-half or half-animal, the other suggestions are too specific.

half animal...

what of fauna flora and characters that are literally half goo or elementary creature(ex: Jinns that have a lower body composed of gas(smoke, steam...)) for example?

Ruku said:
half animal...

what of fauna flora and characters that are literally half goo or elementary creature(ex: Jinns that have a lower body composed of gas(smoke, steam...)) for example?

Jinns seem like elemental creatures to me, rather than a mix of two different species. But flora fauna is a problem. If we want even those included, then that 'half-and-half' suggestion seems to be the only good one so far.

Genjar said:
Jinns seem like elemental creatures to me, rather than a mix of two different species. But flora fauna is a problem. If we want even those included, then that 'half-and-half' suggestion seems to be the only good one so far.

Mind you but what i meant to be exact is that jinns tend to have a human or humanoid upper body while they have a lower body composed of a ambiguous gaseous form rather then human legs, hips and crotch, a similar problem that has so far existed with nagas/lamias thats why i mentioned them.

Regarding short_taurs, what would forms like these fall under post #1096859 ?

half-n-half as i intended is not just species based halves(ex. human|horse) but also form based halves (ex: anthro|feral)

Ruku said:
half-n-half as i intended is not just species based halves(ex. human|horse) but also form based halves (ex: anthro|feral)

It'd be better for searchability to have separate tags for those categories.
Something like, hm... dual_form might work for the example you posted.

And dual_species for half/half species?

Genjar said:
Thanks for the list, makes it easier to see how many combos there are.

Oh, you're welcome.

Genjar said:
There's also ipotane (humanoid / anthro horse), plus numerous OC species. I've seen some with dinosaur legs, etc.

These would be subtags for satyr, don't they?

Genjar said:
[…]. But flora fauna is a problem. If we want even those included, then that 'half-and-half' suggestion seems to be the only good one so far.

A tag for heterogene cobinations of species and body types for animals (humans included) probably is enough for now. If we put cases of flora fauna and fungi fauna under the same tag, the whole thing may end up a real mess.

Genjar said:
Something like, hm... dual_form might work for the example you posted.

And dual_species for half/half species?

Better not. The term "dual_form" may be easily mistagged in cases like this:

post #744419

The same can be said for "dual_species".

Ruku said:
Regarding short_taurs, what would forms like these fall under post #1096859 ?

"Biped_taur" maybe.

SHouldn't this taur and body type discussion be taken to a separate thread? Not just because it's hijacking this one, but because no one will notice in the first place that there's a big discussion about it here.

1. Made a wiki page for kneeing and [[patellar_reflex_test|patellar_reflex_texttest]].
2. Do we have a tag for when one character hits another character so hard that they send the other character flying?

post #90943

giving_up_the_ghost

Borrowed from gelbooru, it's an anime thing where characters who are beaten up or just really tired are depicted with a ghost leaving their body. There's also a tvtropes page on it if you want more info.

post #1123705

stack: A pile of objects, typically one that is neatly arranged.

post #2089 post #271333 post #87633

Not to be confused with pile, though an implication is possible.

post #245386 post #1073472 post #970270

Questions:

• Do/Should we have a tag for the way the dragon is holding the dress in post #1073472 (ie. Holding it against their body to see what it would look like if they were wearing it) or will holding_clothing be enough?
• Is there a tag for bicycle helmets yet? There are 0 instance of bicycle_helmet, cycling_helmet and stack_hat right now.
• What is the vertical equivalent of train_position? post #753066

"Zebroid" tag and respective wiki created.
Next step: suggest some implications.

See for more infomation:
forum #181201 (pages: 13 (bottom) - 14 (top)).

O16 said:
"Zebroid" tag and respective wiki created.
Next step: suggest some implications.

See for more infomation:
forum #181201 (pages: 13 (bottom) - 14 (top)).

I would think just zebra horse hybrid (replace horse with other animals) would work just fine.

By the way, "Text":/forum/show/181201?page=13#post-222273 would create a link directly to the forum post.

Furrin_Gok said:
By the way, "Text":/forum/show/181201?page=13#post-222273 would create a link directly to the forum post.

I know it, but wanted to show the whole discussion, not only the first post.

Furrin_Gok said:
I would think just zebra horse hybrid (replace horse with other animals) would work just fine.

Theoretically yes, but I already saw that this doesn't work well in practice; with this tag and the implications I am planning, the process will be much simpler.

p.s. Why you didn't brought up that point when I presented the idea? I asked for more opinions.

blood_on_* tag set. I didn't create the first ones but I did add several to the list. These work the same way as the cum_on_* tags do but there's a lot less of them.

Edit 25/03/17: Finally got around to creating some wiki pages and updating blood.

O16 said:
I know it, but wanted to show the whole discussion, not only the first post.

The code I provided would have given the whole discussion, starting from that post. That's the use of ?page=X#post-Y, is instead of focusing on the post, it has the whole page.

eyewear_hooked_on_clothing - When eyewear (usually sunglasses) is hooked onto a character's clothing.

post #1104709 post #984848 post #1015736

I'm open to a better name.

Furrin_Gok said:
The code I provided would have given the whole discussion, starting from that post. That's the use of ?page=X#post-Y, is instead of focusing on the post, it has the whole page.

... Oh, now I understand. Thank you for this information, it will be useful; actually the discussion also continues on the following page, but I guess this issue is workaroundable.

BlueDingo said:
eyewear_hooked_on_clothing - When eyewear (usually sunglasses) is hooked onto a character's clothing.

post #1104709 post #984848 post #1015736

I'm open to a better name.

Maybe just "hooked_eyewear", is possible to the eyewear in question be hooked on a character's necklace and " eyewear_hooked_on_necklace" sounds unnecessarily specific.

dragon_ball_(object). Somehow, this was going untagged.

post #572870 post #1040620

Vaulting - The act of leaping or springing while supporting or propelling oneself with one or both hands.

post #937771post #155224post #873570

-----------

Edit 13 hours later: Created a wiki page for tongue_stuck.

post #1108269

Landmark for all landmarks. Natural and man-made, real and fictional.

O16 said:
Maybe just "hooked_eyewear", is possible to the eyewear in question be hooked on a character's necklace and " eyewear_hooked_on_necklace" sounds unnecessarily specific.

Sounds good to me. hooked_eyewear page made, eyewear page updated and found this in the process.

post #613900

bleed_through - When a captured drawing contains a faint version of another picture drawn on the other side of the page. I originally got the name from Danbooru.

post #539381post #69543

I'm open to a better term. Also, would it hurt if I parented it to the faint drawing if it's available proper?

---------------

campaign_hat - A type of wide-brimmed hat.

Wikipedia page

---------------

Edit +3 hours - Just uploaded an image of the tawawa challenge resulting in the creation of the tag. Does this challenge have an english name?

post #1146637

necktie_grab - When a character grabs another character's necktie.

baby_carrier - A backpack-like device that allows a parent to carry a baby on their body. I don't know if this is the official term or not.

one-man_band - When one character is playing several instruments.

+3 days: fake_head_wings - when a character is wearing a fake set of head wings.

post #1147461post #1147455post #1060583post #59069

The idea for itself had been talked about before, but never actually implemented.

Circeus said:
The idea for itself had been talked about before, but never actually implemented.

There's so many "It's not gonna suck itself" images floating about, I'm surprised there's no official tag for it. Itself is a bit vague, so what about not_gonna_do_itself?

Whatever tag is chosen, it should be added to the Related section of text. I added several entries there before.

+1, thanks for following up with tagging set:itself as mentioned in forum #208417.

BlueDingo said:
There's so many "It's not gonna suck itself" images floating about, I'm surprised there's no official tag for it. Itself is a bit vague, so what about not_gonna_do_itself?

That's what I was saying too back in November when we were talking about it. Since then, the closest I've taken note of that's on a lot of things is command, used where it's more directly stated. Maybe something like implied_command or rhetorical_command or something like that would be similar enough to catch the things that don't quite come off as just plain old commands. Then you can also catch things like someone standing there saying just like "...Well...?" or something similarly vague but obvious in intent.

BlueDingo said:
There's so many "It's not gonna suck itself" images floating about, I'm surprised there's no official tag for it. Itself is a bit vague, so what about not_gonna_do_itself?

Whatever tag is chosen, it should be added to the Related section of text. I added several entries there before.

notnobody said:
That's what I was saying too back in November when we were talking about it. Since then, the closest I've taken note of that's on a lot of things is command, used where it's more directly stated. Maybe something like implied_command or rhetorical_command or something like that would be similar enough to catch the things that don't quite come off as just plain old commands. Then you can also catch things like someone standing there saying just like "...Well...?" or something similarly vague but obvious in intent.

I liked the idea of "itself" and it may not be super explicit (but then neither are, say, our rules about how to tag intersex chars if we need a frickin flowchart), but at least it's hard to imagine it being misapplied to other stuff. Anyone think of something genuinely better is welcome to change it!

Circeus said:
I liked the idea of "itself" and it may not be super explicit (but then neither are, say, our rules about how to tag intersex chars if we need a frickin flowchart), but at least it's hard to imagine it being misapplied to other stuff. Anyone think of something genuinely better is welcome to change it!

I'm wondering how many people will associate itself on its own to that meaning. I suggested not_gonna_do_itself because it's more self-explanatory, and the "do" part can represent any applicable action. (Eg. "This room ain't gonna clean itself.")

+1 not_gonna_do_itself. Maybe we can compromise by aliasing itself to not_gonna_do_itself?

*facepalm*

For some reason, I misunderstood Circeus and believed that in forum #225049 ("Do we have a tag for this" thread) he/she/it suggested that this thread here should be "deactivated", I even did a question related to that (but wasn't answered, what let me with this confusion for the last 4 days, thank you guys).
I also did one suggestion separately¹, which would be more appropriate to have been done here (and I also wasn't answered).

¹ forum #225666 (sorting fish tags)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BlueDingo said:
I'm wondering how many people will associate itself on its own to that meaning. I suggested not_gonna_do_itself because it's more self-explanatory, and the "do" part can represent any applicable action. (Eg. "This room ain't gonna clean itself.")

+1. If a tag have a completely strange name, people usually will avoid using it without the true knowledge about what it means (e.g. "off/on"), but if the name is simply ambiguos, is quite possible for someone to think that figured what the tag means and use it inappropriately (e.g. "exposed").

BlueDingo said:

+3 days: fake_head_wings - when a character is wearing a fake set of head wings.

I guess it is unnecessarily specific, since this seems to be a rare thing and we already have "head_ornament" which probably covers it.

BlueDingo said:
There's so many "It's not gonna suck itself" images floating about, I'm surprised there's no official tag for it. Itself is a bit vague, so what about not_gonna_do_itself?

Itself is one of the least intuitive tags that I've seen. Who thought that it was a good idea? ...sheesh.

But do we need not_gonna_do_itself either? Wouldn't dominant + presenting_penis suffice?

Genjar said:
Itself is one of the least intuitive tags that I've seen. Who thought that it was a good idea? ...sheesh.

But do we need not_gonna_do_itself either? Wouldn't dominant + presenting_penis suffice?

1. presenting_penis will not find things like post #834721.
2. This could cover any situation where a character says some variant of "it ain't gonna _____ itself". Dick sucking isn't the only thing this tag would be used for.

BlueDingo said:
1. presenting_penis will not find things like post #834721.

Well, whichever tag is relevant. Presenting_hindquarters for that one. All of which are searchable with presenting.

Regardless, those posts should have the presenting tags. They're currently missing from most.

2. This could cover any situation where a character says some variant of "it ain't gonna _____ itself". Dick sucking isn't the only thing this tag would be used for.

Tagging specific sentences is pretty unusual. Do we even have any other tags like that, besides memes?