Right, so. Splitting off from forum #263428 because that's a very big topic and we don't need to distract from it with an extended conversation about one aspect..

So.

Satyr and faun were unaliased.

This post is a bit of a ride, I'm sorry. I've sectioned out some of my more rambley ramble, but I would suggest reading it as it goes into some related tags...

Genjar said:
They're unaliased now? Something must have changed then, but I have no idea how they're supposed to be tagged.

Neither do we. We unaliased it a few weeks ago after deciding that satyr and faun should probably be different things, however, none of us were quite able to define what those things were at the time. We agreed that the original alias had happened a bit too quickly.

Honestly, I'd meant to start a thread about it, but I am so busy right now it's ridiculous :C

The initial and tentative thought was satyr for a human/goat thing and faun for "full mystical goat thing"

This doesn't really go into deer, which is also a thing and.. hmm..

Okay, according to me, 10 months ago, in forum #247963 ...

Satyr is Roman, and were a man with horse ears and tails and SOMETIMES legs.
Faun is GREEK and were men with a goat's legs, horns and tail.

the whole 'deer' thing didn't come in until the last 100 or so years.

They were both wild woodlands fertility critters, but Satyr were typically more lustful but wise, while faun were more foolish and handsome. But that is personality :P

Oh, I seem to have found, after no particular difficulty, a series of posts demonstrating some of the variations of satyrfauna body structure. I will share it, because it may possibly contribute to the discussion.

post #1285690 post #1365442 post #1353823 post #1350438 post #1289876 post #1358711 post #1289197 post #1056854

And then there was the question of "If a centaur is a horse/human and a fox/horse is called an equine_taur... and a fox/parrot is just "a taur".. then why are these satyr?"

post #724257 post #1117887 post #1086299 post #1210252

(two of my original images have been deleted -- one featured a human female with long elf-y ears. However, around rib-level, she transitions into an anthro fox, with a long fluffy tail, but with cloven hooves. The other features a large human with animal ears. around the hips they transition into a blue-and-orange furred skunk. they stand on plantigrade feet/paws with a long tail.)

Some are split form, but perhaps should be considered satyrfauna-esque.

....

Ugh, okay. It's not even 10 am and this has already been an adventure.

Okay.

Wrapping up.

Some final thoughts:

• using satyrfauna as a tag has kinda grown on me. It saves the issue of picking one incorrect name or another, and dodges the issue of deer-legs.

I think if I were doing this on my own, this would be what I end up with:

• one tag for specific deer/goat/horses-human mixes, something for 'pure' myth-like characters, like satyrfauna_(mythological) (roughly equivalent to 'centaur')
• one tag for both human/hoofy and anthro/hoofy characters --like a human/zebra faun, or a fox/goat faun-- Satyrfauna (equivalent to 'equine_taur')
• MAYBE one tag for non-hoofies.. for example, a human with wolf-legs, or a fox with bird legs, -- Satyrfaunoid? (equivalent to 'taur')

All are split-form... if it's a deer on top and a deer on the bottom, then it's a deer anthro :p

This does potentially interact with the harpies, as a great many of them are animal-legged from the knee-to-hip area with winged_arms and the like.. and that would... technically make them satyrfaunoids or whatever.

This is all just... brain vomit, so nothing set in stone, just... ideas.

Okay i'm done now, thank you.

One thing's for sure: can't be too specific with the tags. Because of all those variations you listed.

If they can't be tagged as satyr, and can't be tagged as faun, then that leaves the more unusual variations without a tag. Not good. So a base tag is needed.

Satyrfaunoid seems a bit too lenghty. How about just satyroid? Goes well with the humanoid tag. And yes, the subspecies could be tagged the same way we tag taurs. cervine_satyroid, equine_satyroid, etc. All implicated to base satyroid.

As for split_form: if it were up to me, I'd restrict that to creatures that are clearly made of two different halves. Most satyrs have animal legs, but also some animal features on upper body (such as horns and often ears). That makes them closer to animal_humanoid than split_form in my eyes. Whereas something like mermaid is a split_form: no fish parts on the upper body, no human parts on lower.

Honestly this is ridiculous and it should never have been unaliased. I dont know why it was to begin with again and the reasons provided for why it was originally aliased were generally speaking good enough.

Outside of Faunus and Satyr being Greek and Roman, theyre fundamental design is identical.

This doesnt need to be split as a result of one specific character.

Using Satyroid (etc) as a general tag works and the proposals for all of this are a mess.

Here's link to the original discussion:
https://e621.net/forum/show/203389

Demesejha said:
Honestly this is ridiculous and it should never have been unaliased. I dont know why it was to begin with again and the reasons provided for why it was originally aliased were generally speaking good enough.

Outside of Faunus and Satyr being Greek and Roman, theyre fundamental design is identical.

This doesnt need to be split as a result of one specific character.

Using Satyroid (etc) as a general tag works and the proposals for all of this are a mess.

Here's link to the original discussion:
https://e621.net/forum/show/203389

Respectfully, you started the conversation so you're not exactly unbiased here. part of the problem is that it was approved *two hours* after it was initially posted, which was something in the predawn hours in america. No one got to discuss *anything* on the matter because it was already done.

Also... did you even read this post?

No, seriously, did you?

Because most of the post was "How should we tag these things, now that we have choices?"

Please tell me how aliasing satyr and faun together answers that. o_o

Your solution's kind of like saying "all taurs are centaurs." ... If we were JUST dealing with humans with goat and deer and horse bits, I could agree, but we're dealing with all sorts of random furry shit in here, c_c

These are not satyrs. Or fauns. or anything similar:
post #1618039 post #1605073 post #1569384 post #1543754 post #1527688

This is why I sought out a series of tags that could cover "Traditional" Satyr/fauns, as well as all the arrays of variations that furries have created over the decades.

"Satyr and faun should be aliased" is not helping with this conversation. It's kind of like yelling "but make sure my soda is in a cup!" while we're trying to figure out if we should get coke or orange soda. o_o

Genjar said:
One thing's for sure: can't be too specific with the tags. Because of all those variations you listed.

Yep. I'm pretty fond of Diet coke myself, but it's always good when I have options.

If they can't be tagged as satyr, and can't be tagged as faun, then that leaves the more unusual variations without a tag. Not good. So a base tag is needed.

Personally, I think that satyr and faun *are* a bit fuzzy, due to the fact that most people have not studied greek and roman mythologies, and thus are not aware of how the words have evolved over the millennia, and probably think of all of them as either faun or Satyr, depending on what they were exposed to first.... so we can't expect people to tag them reliably. S'why I came out with a 'third word' for them.

Satyrfaunoid seems a bit too lenghty. How about just satyroid? Goes well with the humanoid tag. And yes, the subspecies could be tagged the same way we tag taurs. cervine_satyroid, equine_satyroid, etc. All implicated to base satyroid.

I like that.

I also thought about Satyr_fauna to go with the flora_fauna and mineral_fauna and fungi_fauna, but as much as it amuses me, nah. :)

What about faunoid? No, Satyroid sounds better, I think... hm.

As for split_form: if it were up to me, I'd restrict that to creatures that are clearly made of two different halves. Most satyrs have animal legs, but also some animal features on upper body (such as horns and often ears). That makes them closer to animal_humanoid than split_form in my eyes.

I didn't htink that invalidated split-form... Hmm..

Whereas something like mermaid is a split_form: no fish parts on the upper body, no human parts on lower.

So a mermaid with webbed fingers would not be a split form? or ear-fins? or pointed ears? or gills?

Hmm.. a lot of the posts tagged split form right now don't seem like they'd apply... :/