I was browsing art on the site and thought that someone was doing poor untagging, but "implied_fellatio", among other 'implied' tags were removed less than a month ago with the sited reason "We don't do implied tags"? The tags have been used for 1year+, no forum post was made about the tags' invalidation, no substitutes were offered for them, and not even all the most popular 'implied' tags were invalidated.

Am I missing something, or is the random deceleration that we "don't do" something, when we've clearly been tagging and searching for said thing, extremely disruptive and unnecessary?

Feel free to offer substitute tags to search for, actually explain the decision, or finally get on the obvious parallel tags like "implied_cunnilingus" if they're really supposed to be gone.

Thanks in advance.

I would imagine as our tagging system is based on visuals alone, even text counts as external information, at that point there's usually nothing to be implied, it either is or isn't.

So e.g. if it's not clear that there's actual fellatio going, use head_in_crotch.

Mairo said:
I would imagine as our tagging system is based on visuals alone, even text counts as external information, at that point there's usually nothing to be implied, it either is or isn't.

So e.g. if it's not clear that there's actual fellatio going, use head_in_crotch.

That's fair enough. However, in addition to the fact that head_in_crotch is added to FAR fewer images than the implied_fellatio/cunnilingus tags were (and it will likely stay that way, especially since there was forum post on the topic for people who decide to fix this stuff, + my next point), there's also not a clear overlap between the two tags at all. Different angles, as well as convenient_censorship or a number of other obstructions means that you're going to have an unnecessarily hard time using multiple tags to get the same effect as implied_fellatio. The point of the implied tags was never that it was unclear if someone was doing something sexual, it so people could find a specific variety of artwork about it, like any other tag. #7065, for example, is widely loved BECAUSE of its lack of explicitly drawn sex stuff. It happened to get luck because "-penis" works, but that's not the case for all art, especially comics.

Sticking to the supposed site-wide rule of "we don't do implied tags" is clearly not working here so far. This is way less productive than the removal of something like the subjective tags or requested aliases.

Sometimes it is very obvious that a picture is deliberately implying an act and it doesn't require an art degree to figure it out. Also, implications are an innate quality of an image, period, and therefore is valid as a tag. What you folks are talking about is inference, which is the act of bringing outside information to an image, and wouldn't be valid for tagging.

If it's obvious that there's fellatio going on, tag it as fellatio. Just like how you tag sex even if there's no visible genitalia. None of that 'implied' stuff.

And if it isn't obvious, there's the suggestive tag-group for that.

The implied_transformation, implied_pregnancy, and implied_incest should still be valid, since they seem to have a proper use.