Implicating peeping → being_watched
Link to implication

Reason:

Self-explanatory.

post #518199
im pretty sure that this would qualify for peeping, but not for being watched since whatever he is looking at is not visible in the image

Eggplant said:
post #518199
im pretty sure that this would qualify for peeping, but not for being watched since whatever he is looking at is not visible in the image

Interesting find. Usually the one peeping & the one being watched are in the same image. Looks like being watched will have to be added manually on necessary images.

Eggplant said:
post #518199
im pretty sure that this would qualify for peeping, but not for being watched since whatever he is looking at is not visible in the image

this isn't really a great example because it looks like the person who is peeping is being watched by someone with a camera

post #1041623

Here's an example that wasn't tagged as peeping.

Cane751 said:
Implicating peeping → being_watched
Link to implication

Reason:

Self-explanatory.

Not self-explanatory at all.
Being_watched is for non-sexual watching (as it says on the wiki), whereas peeping is typically sexual (and therefore tagged as voyeur more often than as being watched).

Those are kept separate so that it's possible to differentiate between random onlookers and voyeurism in the searches.

Genjar said:
Those are kept separate so that it's possible to differentiate between random onlookers and voyeurism in the searches.

A little late, but thanks. I got it.

Genjar said:
Being_watched is for non-sexual watching (as it says on the wiki)

Direct wiki quote: "Tagged when someone is being watched. Similar to a voyeur, but there is no indication that the watcher is taking pleasure from watching the act, be it sexual or not."

Cane751 said:
Direct wiki quote: "Tagged when someone is being watched. Similar to a voyeur, but there is no indication that the watcher is taking pleasure from watching the act, be it sexual or not."

Yes, like it says. Non-sexual watching, regardless of the act.

Basically:
post #1466635 - being_watched for the viewer on the left side, and voyeur for the ones on the right.

(That system is not exactly intuitive, but it still works better than the former system. I'm actually surprised by how consistently those are tagged, I expected it to become a major mess over time..)

Cane751 said:
A little late, but thanks. I got it.

Direct wiki quote: "Tagged when someone is being watched. Similar to a voyeur, but there is no indication that the watcher is taking pleasure from watching the act, be it sexual or not."

but there is no indication that he watcher is taking pleasure from watching the act, be it sexual or not.

The act being watched can be sexual or not, but the watcher is not.

Furrin_Gok said:
The act being watched can be sexual or not, but the watcher is not.

@Furrin_Gok

Cane751 said:
A little late, but thanks. I got it.

Also, Genjar mentioned this.

-----

Due to Eggplant's post I realized this tag implication request is a bad idea.

Cane751 said:
@Furrin_Gok

Also, Genjar mentioned this.

-----

Due to Eggplant's post I realized this tag implication request is a bad idea.

You don't need to @ me when just by quoting me the "find mentions of me in the forums" will already find it. @'s just make it stand out :P