Should Taur be a general tag or should Anthro and Feral be species tags?

tritlupo said:
Should Taur be a general tag or should Anthro and Feral be species tags?

taur are mythological species, anthro and feral are body structures. Everything is how it should be.

Versperus said:
taur are mythological species, anthro and feral are body structures. Everything is how it should be.

Thanks for your reply. I am waiting for an opinion from an administator or moderator.

Versperus said:
taur are mythological species

Not officially, no.

anthro and feral are body structures.

Around here, taur is used as a body structure since there was no official term for it.

Versperus said:
taur are mythological species, anthro and feral are body structures. Everything is how it should be.

Citation? I know that Centaur are mythological creatures, but not "Taur" in general.

tritlupo said:
Thanks for your reply. I am waiting for an opinion from an administator or moderator.

it's all a little wibbley, but generally, yeah, kinda what Versperus said. we could probably mix it up and do it the other way instead, but we've been doing it this way for like 10 years.

Taur is roughly in the same category as animal_humanoid -- it's a big broad category that describes a particular type of character.

fox_humanoid is a animal_humanoid.
Fox_taur is a taur

There's not really an 'X is an anthro' statement that could be made, though. A fox CAN be anthro. or feral! It's an option. A foxtaur is always a taur.

I guess Anthro and feral are a bit like gender/sex tags. -- There's a lot of variation on what one looks like, some look more like one than another... but generally speaking, you can't be both a male and a herm. You can't be both anthro AND feral.

But you can be a fox_taur AND a taur.

maybe that makes sense?

SnowWolf said:
it's all a little wibbley, but generally, yeah, kinda what Versperus said. we could probably mix it up and do it the other way instead, but we've been doing it this way for like 10 years.

Taur is roughly in the same category as animal_humanoid -- it's a big broad category that describes a particular type of character.

fox_humanoid is a animal_humanoid.
Fox_taur is a taur

There's not really an 'X is an anthro' statement that could be made, though. A fox CAN be anthro. or feral! It's an option. A foxtaur is always a taur.

I guess Anthro and feral are a bit like gender/sex tags. -- There's a lot of variation on what one looks like, some look more like one than another... but generally speaking, you can't be both a male and a herm. You can't be both anthro AND feral.

But you can be a fox_taur AND a taur.

maybe that makes sense?

Maybe changing anthro and feral to species tags and using tags like anthro_fox will work. If you think a little bit about it, someone will be searching for an image with an anthro fox and a feral wolf so it will search "anthro feral fox wolf" and end up finding a picture with a feral fox and an anthro wolf.

tritlupo said:
Maybe changing anthro and feral to species tags and using tags like anthro_fox will work. If you think a little bit about it, someone will be searching for an image with an anthro fox and a feral wolf so it will search "anthro feral fox wolf" and end up finding a picture with a feral fox and an anthro wolf.

There are 1,522,052 posts on here. If we could retag one picture a second, it'd take about 423 hours, or about 17.6 days. One picture a second. With no sleep, drinking, blinking or anything.

One second per picture is not reasonable. 2 seconds would mean it would be 35.2 days. more realistic is probably closer to 10 or 15 seconds per image. I'll let you do the math.

Anthro_fox would be a very nice tag, but it would take So. Freakin. Long. to get everything retagged.

Now add in that if we decided to go through Every. Single. Picture on the website, there are several other things we would want to do too -- adding even more to that time.

It's a nice idea, but it's about 11 years too late, man. :c

SnowWolf said:
There are 1,522,052 posts on here. If we could retag one picture a second, it'd take about 423 hours, or about 17.6 days. One picture a second. With no sleep, drinking, blinking or anything.

One second per picture is not reasonable. 2 seconds would mean it would be 35.2 days. more realistic is probably closer to 10 or 15 seconds per image. I'll let you do the math.

Anthro_fox would be a very nice tag, but it would take So. Freakin. Long. to get everything retagged.

Now add in that if we decided to go through Every. Single. Picture on the website, there are several other things we would want to do too -- adding even more to that time.

It's a nice idea, but it's about 11 years too late, man. :c

I would've gone with werefox over anthro_fox to completely decouple the anthros from the ferals just like the humanoids and taurs, but yeah. WAY too many images to retag.

BlueDingo said:
I would've gone with werefox over anthro_fox to completely decouple the anthros from the ferals just like the humanoids and taurs, but yeah. WAY too many images to retag.

SnowWolf said:
There are 1,522,052 posts on here. If we could retag one picture a second, it'd take about 423 hours, or about 17.6 days. One picture a second. With no sleep, drinking, blinking or anything.

One second per picture is not reasonable. 2 seconds would mean it would be 35.2 days. more realistic is probably closer to 10 or 15 seconds per image. I'll let you do the math.

Anthro_fox would be a very nice tag, but it would take So. Freakin. Long. to get everything retagged.

Now add in that if we decided to go through Every. Single. Picture on the website, there are several other things we would want to do too -- adding even more to that time.

It's a nice idea, but it's about 11 years too late, man. :c

E621 has millions of visits per day, it would not take too long.

tritlupo said:
E621 has millions of visits per day, it would not take too long.

only handful of users actually touch the whole tagging system. and only like 0,1% of the people who ever touch the tagging system at all are invested enough to make more than like 1k edits or take part in ANY tagging projects.

in other words the visitor amount is meaningless because only extremely minimal amount of them do jack shit for the site or take part to any tagging projects.

tritlupo said:
E621 has millions of visits per day, it would not take too long.

That's greatly exaggerated
But even if it were true, only about 5% of the userbase contributes in some way.

Versperus said:
That's greatly exaggerated
But even if it were true, only about 5% of the userbase contributes in some way.

Okay, I meant thousands, maybe hundreds.

neither, they are fine as they are.

tritlupo said:
E621 has millions of visits per day, it would not take too long.

Visitors don't help. I see people asking how to add a tag to a post all the dang time. If you never engage with that part of the site, you don't know how to do it. codding something to ask everyone to tag 3 pictures, while a nice idea, doesn't work. you'l get people adding asdasdfsad to a post to make it go away so they can get to the porn.

In the last week, 24.4% of tag edits came from one user. another 12.6% came from another person. In total, 45.9% of tag edits from the last week have been from FIVE people.

It's a nice idea, but it's not gonna happen. the logistics of it are crazy enough as it is.