Genjar said:
What's with that new female_rape wiki entry?

Was that actually discussed somewhere, or did someone just make it up own their own? Disregarding the usefulness of the tag itself, tagging intersex as female_* seems like asking for mistags...

Yeah, it looks like someone just decided to make a tag without discussing it. In my opinion, female_domination can replace that

Oi, guys. I might need some help with tagging ghstkatt's future uploads (see history of the last two to give you an idea of how they were)

It's pretty late (read "very early" or "5:15Am", whichever you prefer) and I should be sleeping

Xch3l said:
Oi, guys. I might need some help with tagging ghstkatt's future uploads (see history of the last two to give you an idea of how they were)

It's pretty late (read "very early" or "5:15Am", whichever you prefer) and I should be sleeping

I'll look into from time to time

Would someone like to help clean up the artist tag? I understand that besides accidentally putting a space in "artist:NAME", the artist tag is an outdated construct from the earlier years of e621, as evident in old posts like this one. I'm probably only going to clean up a few per day since I'm cleaning up other tags.

Agh, nevermind. After taking a second look, I realized I was being stupid.

Peekaboo said:
I'd like some help with fixing this, posts missing orientation tags, mostly straight.

female male -straight sex -bisexual -intersex -gay -ambiguous_gender
I've gone through and tagged close to 40 pages now, but help would be appreciated, especially with the anime/Asian media ones.

I'll help

Peekaboo said:
I'd like some help with fixing this, posts missing orientation tags, mostly straight.

female male -straight sex -bisexual -intersex -gay -ambiguous_gender
I've gone through and tagged close to 40 pages now, but help would be appreciated, especially with the anime/Asian media ones.

I have attacked that tag so many times, and it just keeps coming back

I might start deleting the translation_request tag for the pics that are done with translation, and add the corresponding tag for the language (I can recognize Japanese, Korean, Chinese and German).

PS: By the way, is it possible to add a tag to a research or a pool? For example, if all the pics from the search translation_request nezumi or a comic that needs translation are in japanese, can I add japanese_text to all of them in an easy way? Thank you.

Fmafanclub said:
I might start deleting the translation_request tag for the pics that are done with translation, and add the corresponding tag for the language (I can recognize Japanese, Korean, Chinese and German).

PS: By the way, is it possible to add a tag to a research or a pool? For example, if all the pics from the search translation_request nezumi or a comic that needs translation are in japanese, can I add japanese_text to all of them in an easy way? Thank you.

You can search the pool and then add the tag manually/with a script if priv+, just let me know and I can help you do that, otherwise it's time consuming for regular users to do it

Just a question, was the looking_at_viewer tag removed?

DSTakumiDerp said:
Just a question, was the looking_at_viewer tag removed?

Still close to 70k images with that tag, so I'd say nope.

Nyteshade said:
Still close to 70k images with that tag, so I'd say nope.

I only see two listed

DSTakumiDerp said:
I only see two listed

Go check your blacklist because I see 451 pages

Working on cleaning up the "Handjob Masturbation -Solo" filter right now. I've already cleared the first page.

Curious to know, how do I go about 'copyrighting' my name to add to the tags? I've got several works that I've commissioned that other folks have just posted on here, and it wasn't until recently that I saw that certain folks can be copyrighted (example: sonicfox).

suikodudeman said:
Curious to know, how do I go about 'copyrighting' my name to add to the tags? I've got several works that I've commissioned that other folks have just posted on here, and it wasn't until recently that I saw that certain folks can be copyrighted (example: sonicfox).

you just prefix it with copy: and it will turn into a copyright tag if the tag has less than 15 posts tagged on it. If it has more than 15, you will need to pm an admin like me so we can set it for you

I was thinking of cleaning up the fight, battle and combat tags a bit... but I'm not even sure where to begin. They're all used in various ways, ranging from solo poses to mass combat.

I can't tell the difference. Are there any actual nuances in how those should be tagged, or would those be good candidates for aliasing?

Genjar said:
I was thinking of cleaning up the fight, battle and combat tags a bit... but I'm not even sure where to begin. They're all used in various ways, ranging from solo poses to mass combat.

I can't tell the difference. Are there any actual nuances in how those should be tagged, or would those be good candidates for aliasing?

I think fight should be used for unarmed, or improvised weapons (baseball bat, tire iron, a stick, etc.) Combat and battle, IMO, should be aliased.

If somebody is looking for a big time consuming project. I want you to eliminate every post here arttags:0. All you need to do, is find and tag the artist, or add unknown_artist.

Just as a side note. Some of the later posts will have an artist tag. For those images, just add a tag to clear 'em.

Related to this , can somebody make a quick cleanup of those tags? (click in "this" and "that")

Xch3l said:
Related to this , can somebody make a quick cleanup of those tags? (click in "this" and "that")

Done :3

slyroon said:
Done :3

Danke, much appreciated. I did some in the morning, btw.

-solo -duo -group

One character is solo, two is a duo, any more is a group.

Over 175000 posts, so get to work!

Edit: What should I tag post #24455? It has zero characters...

Nightdragon939 said:
-solo -duo -group

One character is solo, two is a duo, any more is a group.

Over 175000 posts, so get to work!

Edit: What should I tag post #24455? It has zero characters...

...how isn't that deleted? That's not art. -.-; No characters, no solo/duo/group.

Just noticed .. -anthro -feral -human has 2936 pages of posts, 85% of which are clearly.. you guessed it, either anthro or feral.

EDIT:
Also, there has been some talk of 'tag scripts'. Are these currently operational? I can't find them in the mode menu per the instructions given in this thread. Really I just want a mode that simply adds a predefined tag to posts, or removes a predefined tag from posts.

savageorange said:
Just noticed .. -anthro -feral -human has 2936 pages of posts, 85% of which are clearly.. you guessed it, either anthro or feral.

Yep, though that's slowly getting better.
We only started tagging anthros a few months back, and there's already 110k+ images with that tag. I estimate that at this rate, most of them will be tagged by the end of the year.

I always try to add those myself, whenever I'm working on my projects.

Also, there has been some talk of 'tag scripts'. Are these currently operational? I can't find them in the mode menu per the instructions given in this thread. Really I just want a mode that simply adds a predefined tag to posts, or removes a predefined tag from posts.

Unfortunately, tag scripting is only available to privileged+ users. I suppose that's understandable, since tag vandalism would be a lot worse if everyone could use scripting.

And privileged seems to be hard to get these days. Too hard, I'd say. There's so many good taggers who could do more if they only had access to scripting.

Thanks for the clarification, Genjar.

Do you happen to know why some implications are incompletely applied?
For example 'canine -mammal' returns 27000+ results, even though canine implies mammal. Another example is 'tan_fur -fur'.

savageorange said:
Do you happen to know why some implications are incompletely applied?
For example 'canine -mammal' returns 27000+ results, even though canine implies mammal. Another example is 'tan_fur -fur'.

Implied tags get added automatically to the new posts, but the old ones need to be edited manually to trigger the implications (even a blank edit would suffice).

Usually someone tag scripts the implications after they've been accepted, but in some cases there's just so many of them...and so little time.

Genjar said:
Implied tags get added automatically to the new posts, but the old ones need to be edited manually to trigger the implications (even a blank edit would suffice).

Usually someone tag scripts the implications after they've been accepted, but in some cases there's just so many of them...and so little time.

This doesn't sound right to me. When an implication is approved, automatically adding the implied tag to all necessary posts is part of the process.

This looks more to me like the site just failing in the middle of an implication approval. =/ Which I'm pretty sure I've seen happen fairly often too. I'll bring it up with the devs...

Char said:
This looks more to me like the site just failing in the middle of an implication approval. =/ Which I'm pretty sure I've seen happen fairly often too. I'll bring it up with the devs...

Well, damn. It happens so often that I thought it was a feature. If it's supposed to be fully automated, then yeah... it doesn't work for most implications, and hasn't worked for as long as I remember. For instance, that tan_fur -> fur implication is nine months old.

savageorange said:
Just noticed .. -anthro -feral -human has 2936 pages of posts, 85% of which are clearly.. you guessed it, either anthro or feral.

EDIT:
Also, there has been some talk of 'tag scripts'. Are these currently operational? I can't find them in the mode menu per the instructions given in this thread. Really I just want a mode that simply adds a predefined tag to posts, or removes a predefined tag from posts.

I'm thinking of working on this project, but what would you tag this https://e621.net/post/show/151 things like this are tripping me up

Queen_Tyr'ahnee said:
I'm thinking of working on this project, but what would you tag this https://e621.net/post/show/151 things like this are tripping me up

I see that a few people have been working on this, it's down to 2917 pages now! Good work. I'm carving away at '-anthro anthrofied' myself.

I think that image is just an indication that the search should also exclude 'animal_ears': IMO animal_ears is a category that's sort of between human and anthro..
Something like post #326571 is a good guide.
It has a scale 5 .. 1, where:

1 = human (or possibly humanized)

2 = animal_ears (and possibly humanized, it applies in the case of post #326571)

3 = anthro

4, 5 = feral (technically 4 is a distinct category, but we don't have a tag for it. If we did, I'd call it semi-feral)

In the case you mentioned, I think that is a clear case of animal_ears, so no change needed. Reading the wiki on animal_ears mentions the criteria - "characters appear almost entirely Human, but have the ears, usually the tail, and sometimes the paws or nose, of a specific animal".

Here's a revised search link .

Edit: Char, My experience is much the same as genjar's WRT implication failure. I've encountered a fair few cases over time. I can script something to compile a comprehensive list of implications that haven't been fully applied, if you want.
Edit2: I did this. The results are here as a list of query strings which return results but should return no results, ordered approximately most results -> least results.

savageorange said:
4, 5 = feral (technically 4 is a distinct category, but we don't have a tag for it. If we did, I'd call it semi-feral)

4 would be semi-anthro

Jatix said:

4 would be semi-anthro

Oh, thanks!

So

1. human/humanized
2. animal_ears (+humanized, sometimes)
3. anthro
4. semi-anthro
5. feral

Wow, the semi-anthro tag needs some TLC. There are definitely more than 100 pics showing semi-anthros.

I'm not sure about semi-anthro.
If we actually started using that, then we'd need tags like human_on_semi-anthro, anthro_on_semi-anthro,...

I think it'd be best to just try to fit them in either anthro or feral. Although I know how tough that can be in borderline cases.

Genjar said:
I'm not sure about semi-anthro.
If we actually started using that, then we'd need tags like human_on_semi-anthro, anthro_on_semi-anthro,...

I think it'd be best to just try to fit them in either anthro or feral. Although I know how tough that can be in borderline cases.

Should it be nuked then?

For post #151 that was mentioned earlier, why not just use "hybrid" "human" "fox" "fox_ears" and "fox_tail"? No need to over-confuse it.

Nyteshade said:
For post #151 that was mentioned earlier, why not just use "hybrid" "human" "fox" "fox_ears" and "fox_tail"? No need to over-confuse it.

Fine by me, but do note that animal_ears appears to be intended for that specific type of situation, according to its description.

I'm sick and can't get out of bed. Spending time tagging this tagcount:<10 -rating:e Already tagged like 30 or maybe more. If somebody want me to don't do it please just tell me. I will spend the whole weekend in here tagging until I get better ~w~

Just finished running some more analysis. It seems that the extent of the incomplete implication processing is that each post on e621 is missing, on average, 0.24 tags (iow, every 4.13th post is missing at least one tag).

This is based on analysis of a set of 102700 records (24820 tags in total would be added by implication processing.).

JSON format result of the analysis is here as a dictionary {'add':{'tagname':[postid,postid...]},'rm':{'tagname':[postid, postid...]}}

22563 of these added tags are 'mammal'. By comparison, the next most frequent missing tag, 'fur' only has 623 taggings missing from the sample.

By extrapolation ((454572 / 102700 ) * 22563), there are about 99k taggings of 'mammal' missing from the total database, with 2.7k taggings of 'fur' missing, etc.

There are also missing removals (posts on which an alias has not been correctly resolved -- 'candles', for example, has 27 posts where this tag wasn't changed to 'candle'). In the JSON data linked, these are the items in the 'rm' section. Not sure why those taggings are still around.

EDIT: I noticed just now that the 'total number of posts' figure I was using is wrong (included duplicates), so the figures are slightly off.

Spotted this: 14 pages of big breasts -female -intersex -male -ambiguous_gender

AFAICS they all warrant the 'female' tag, without exception.

EDIT: Fixed.

I made an experimental system for locally saving search results and navigating through them.
Output for 'airship' currently is here (temporary page, will be deleted Jun 18) . It shows bookmarklet links ("<<", ">>") that can be dragged to your bookmarks toolbar and clicked to navigate through the list of results -- providing you are already on a page in the results -- eg this is the first item in the above saved query, so hitting the '>>' bookmarklet will work from there.

Nightdragon939 said:
-solo -duo -group

One character is solo, two is a duo, any more is a group.

Over 175000 posts, so get to work!

Edit: What should I tag post #24455? It has zero characters...

I'll do some work on that project! :D

Something just entered my mind. Technically, a duo doesn't need to be specified with tags. Consider that we have Solo for single characters, and Group for anything from three on upward. Assuming these are all being tagged correctly, that automatically leaves you with just one possibility for a post that has neither of those tags: a duo.

With that in mind, I don't think it would be worth the massive effort it would take to rework all those old posts. But if anyone still feels compelled to, go ahead of course.

Jugofthat said:
Something just entered my mind. Technically, a duo doesn't need to be specified with tags. Consider that we have Solo for single characters, and Group for anything from three on upward. Assuming these are all being tagged correctly, that automatically leaves you with just one possibility for a post that has neither of those tags: a duo.

Sounds like a good feature request ('1-to-N search-only aliases'), there are a number of these 'indirect taggings' / 'inferred taggings'. People mostly won't bother to remember the necessary queries in full because of added complexity, IMO.

I've tested my bookmarklet system some more and successfully checked the whole big breasts -female -intersex -male -ambiguous_gender query (685 results, now only about 7 remain) for false positive 'female' tags in it, after previously batch tagging it with 'female'.

The few items remaining in that query, who knows how to tag them.. I mean look at that one of the Ditto.

Here is a page with bookmarklets for navigating through the first 8100 items of the '-solo -duo -group' query (scroll to the bottom of the page). There's also this page which provides a sort of "progress bar".

(The above pages/bookmarklets were generated using this Python3 script, which runs an e621 query for the first 8100 items of the specified query (== 1 commandline argument), then generates a page with bookmarklets, progress bar, and JSON list of ids.)

TL.DR: you can use the above linked bookmarklets to navigate sort of like a manga site through the items of the query, with the caveat being it's based on saved query results -- Changes to tags won't affect whether the bookmarklet visits a post, the bookmarklet would have to be regenerated from a fresh query for that.

If you have Python3 and wget installed, you can also generate similar pages/bookmarklets yourself. I generated the above stuff using the command './htmlize "-solo -duo -group"'

Jugofthat said:
Something just entered my mind. Technically, a duo doesn't need to be specified with tags. Consider that we have Solo for single characters, and Group for anything from three on upward. Assuming these are all being tagged correctly, that automatically leaves you with just one possibility for a post that has neither of those tags: a duo.

With that in mind, I don't think it would be worth the massive effort it would take to rework all those old posts. But if anyone still feels compelled to, go ahead of course.

Advantage of duo tag is that if someone is searching specifically for images with two characters they only need one tag "duo" instead of two "-solo -group".

I try working on "-solo -duo -group" pool here and there, but it seems to grow faster than it's reduced.

It just occurred to me that part of the 'solo duo group' thing is automatable:

• any post which has 2 character tags should automatically be tagged 'duo' (and untagged 'solo' if applicable)
• any post which has >2 character tags should automatically be tagged 'group' (and untagged 'duo' if applicable)
• this processing can occur when edits to post tags are submitted.

That only leaves 'solo' (which shouldn't be tagged on the basis of one character tag, because this would generate tag churn for pictures that are just beginning to be tagged)

Btw, is anybody using the navigation system I put together?

savageorange said:
It just occurred to me that part of the 'solo duo group' thing is automatable (...)

Good thought, but not good enough. This method could conflict with tags like original_character if the image is a solo picture but the OC also has its own character tag. Or when the image has any number of unnamed characters. There's also invalid_color that tends to be a character tag.

Good point.

EsalRider said:
There's also invalid_color that tends to be a character tag.

What? How does invalid_color being a character tag make sense? Does that happen if you name a character after a color?

savageorange said:
Good point.

What? How does invalid_color being a character tag make sense? Does that happen if you name a character after a color?

I have no idea, but I guess so. Though it is easier to spot it this way.

It's an interesting idea, but there's couple of other reasons why it wouldn't work. There's too many nameless characters; and some characters get two tags. Such as Meowser, who is tagged as both Meowser and Bowser. I'm not fan of those implications for various reasons, but the admins seem pretty adamant on keeping them.

savageorange said:
What? How does invalid_color being a character tag make sense? Does that happen if you name a character after a color?

Invalid color has been set as a general tag a couple of times, but it always reverts back to a character tag sooner or later. That can probably be blamed on Pokemon, since the manga characters are named after colors (Red, Blue, Yellow, etc.)

savageorange said:
It just occurred to me that part of the 'solo duo group' thing is automatable

In addition to points already made: there's also cases of named characters with unnamed, solo individuals with plushies of other named characters (which gets character names, but not group designation), and plenty of cases where not all appropriate name tags were put on in the first place.

I just started working on the "solo duo group" tagging horror. Got a few questions. post #497737 Duo? post #497701 Duo?
Also could characters wayyy in the background count to make something that would otherwise be a solo into a group? Aaand another also. Do disembodied penises count as a character? Probably going to have many more questions for you all as I continue tagging.

The first post you linked is flagged as a repost of post #25643 . The original is tagged 'solo', which IMO is reasonable when it is clearly two or more views of the same single character.

The second post is annoying. The 'Duo' wiki page is unhelpful as to actually what are the boundaries of 'duo'. Looking at 'solo' though, people seem to think that it's reserved for images where there is no part of any other character visible, even if another character is implied (by POV, dialog, or other details).

IMO if solo's definition is that restrictive, we need another tag for one character interacting with a few visible bits of one or more other characters. This applies to many of the images tagged bukkake for example: lots of disembodied dicks does not make a group IMO. Group is specified as three or more characters. The 'duo' wiki page should probably also specify two or more characters after it is done going on about Monty Python.

EDIT: Aargh, the 'spaces disappear' bug has appeared in the forum. I noticed it when I posted this reply.

Killersweet said:
I just started working on the "solo duo group" tagging horror. Got a few questions.

I'd say solo for first as it's same character, just different poses. Then duo with solo_focus for second.

Killersweet said:
Also could characters wayyy in the background count to make something that would otherwise be a solo into a group? Aaand another also. Do disembodied penises count as a character? Probably going to have many more questions for you all as I continue tagging.

If the wavy characters in background are recognizable as being characters I count them, but then put solo_focus if only one character is clear/focused on.

Disembodied penises do count as characters (but not dildos or tentacles). However, if the source of the tentacles is a specific creature you can see, it counts.

Nyteshade said:
Disembodied penises do count as characters (but not dildos or tentacles). However, if the source of the tentacles is a specific creature you can see, it counts.

ah, solo_focus. Okay. Wiki 'see also' section for 'solo' edited.

Tentacles not being considered character(s) but disembodied penises being characters is strange.
I don't think anyone would disagree that a picture showing 3+ characters clearly is rather different than a picture showing one character and two penises (or crotches, asses, boobs, anything that is not clearly identifiable as belonging to a specific character) . If 'group' doesn't make that distinction, is there a tag that does? If not, should we have one?

savageorange said:
If 'group' doesn't make that distinction, is there a tag that does? If not, should we have one?

There isn't that I'm aware. Other than the fact that you can thin the herd of results by adding -disembodied_penis to your search.

Don't know about a new tag. Could be idea for a new thread to discuss.

Since there is such a lively debate on some exemptions/inclusions I'll stick to the obvious and leave the questionable ones for further debate. Thanks for the help.

Nyteshade said:
There isn't that I'm aware. Other than the fact that you can thin the herd of results by adding -disembodied_penis to your search.

Don't know about a new tag. Could be idea for a new thread to discuss.

I just realized you can achieve this effect using 'group -solo_focus', assuming solo_focus is correctly tagged. or, yeah, 'group -disembodied_*'.

Having a tag for it probably doesn't matter though -- looking at the results, group disembodied_* has only 10 pages of results compared to group -disembodied_* 's 272 pages.

This one always gives me a pause when I see it in my projects:
post #385763

The shadow makes it obvious that there's an another character, but all we see is the shadow. Solo or duo with solo focus?

Genjar said:
This one always gives me a pause when I see it in my projects:
post #385763

The shadow makes it obvious that there's an another character, but all we see is the shadow. Solo or duo with solo focus?

Those ones give me pause too. My thought is that the shadow should be treated as a speech balloon from out-of-frame. That is, we know there's someone else around, but they aren't actually in the picture.

So for this I'd say solo and shadow. There's enough of these type of images that a tag for that type of thing could be useful though. Don't know what that would be though.. implied_presence? unseen_participant?

Dunno. Would need to be specific enough to a shadow implying another present that it wouldn't just be used anytime another character could be assumed present through dialog, but no actual visible sign of them there.

I've been working on "-solo -duo -group -comic" ...952 pages. I managed to keep the count going any higher but that's about it. 320 tag edits and nothing to really show... It seems about 20%-25% percent of the posts without a "solo,duo,or group" tag are from the same uploaders. Should I say something? Maybe send a friendly PM. I don't want to seem like a backseat moderator...

savageorange said:
Tentacles not being considered character(s) but disembodied penises being characters is strange.

Yeah, that always seemed a bit odd to me.
Just like disembodied cocks, tentacles are usually connected to something. Even if they're plant or slime tentacles, since we count flora fauna and goo as characters.

Nyteshade said:
Those ones give me pause too. My thought is that the shadow should be treated as a speech balloon from out-of-frame. That is, we know there's someone else around, but they aren't actually in the picture.

That's a good point. It should be tagged the same way as off-screen speech balloons.

Though what throws me off about that particular pic is that it can be tagged as two species (human and dragon), so tagging it as solo... just feels off somehow.

So for this I'd say solo and shadow. There's enough of these type of images that a tag for that type of thing could be useful though. Don't know what that would be though.. implied_presence? unseen_participant?

Yeah, those are pretty common and could be worth tagging.
Though I'm not sure which tag would be best for it.

What about animations? In one scene it could be solo in another it could be a duo or group. Example: post #475494

Killersweet said:
What about animations? In one scene it could be solo in another it could be a duo or group.

Go by total characters in the upload. So, if you have three different scenes, each with a single character, but they are all different characters then it gets group. Same if you see one talking, then it cuts to two other characters interacting.

If it's one character, but shown in various different scenes or poses, it's still solo.

(At least that's the way I've seen it being handled.)

Killersweet said:
What about animations? In one scene it could be solo in another it could be a duo or group. Example: post #475494

I thought of 'multi-part' but that tag doesn't appear to exist (and isn't great anyway).

Reminds me of the whole 'same character, multiple views' thing. Is there a tag for that? montage kind of fits but only has a few taggings. I just found multiple_views, that seems 'correct' but is very undertagged.
Then I found multiple_scenes which seems more like it should fit the 'multiple animation segments' criteria that you specify, but is actually used in the same way as multiple_views (it has more taggings though).

Nyteshade said:
Go by total characters in the upload. So, if you have three different scenes, each with a single character, but they are all different characters then it gets group. Same if you see one talking, then it cuts to two other characters interacting.

Yeah, that sounds right.

Though images with multiple completely unrelated scenes are trickier. I remember being told to treat such as separate images. Like this one:
post #176344

As far as I've understood it, it should be tagged as both solo (for Bowser up there) and duo. Though I'm not sure if that's the proper way of tagging them, since those generally get pruned down to one tag by other users.

savageorange said:
I thought of 'multi-part' but that tag doesn't appear to exist (and isn't great anyway).

Maybe sequence? Though it's currently tagged for both image series, and for single-image (or animation) sequences. I'm not sure which is the proper usage, but I'd go with the latter...since we have pools for the former.

Genjar said:
Though images with multiple completely unrelated scenes are trickier. I remember being told threat such as separate images. Like this one:
post #176344

As far as I've understood it, it should be tagged as both solo (for Bowser up there) and duo. Though I'm not sure if that's the proper way of tagging them, since those generally get pruned down to one tag by other users.

Well, that's usually how I do those type of situations too. Because each group is wholly seperate from the rest. Like different doodles on the same page. It's one solo doodle, and then three duo/couples. So I'd tag each one seperately. If they were meant to be seen as one group image, then why is bowser cut in half and floating above the kissing couple? It just doesn't make sense that way. So, because each grouping is drawn as if it was a seperate picture, that's how I'd tag them. Hopefully that's actually how you're supposed to do it. It's not something that comes up a whole lot to begin with.

I finished "-solo -duo -group" on crystal-for-evers art. Any sugestions on an artists post y'all would like to see done next?

Killersweet said:
I finished "-solo -duo -group" on crystal-for-evers art. Any sugestions on an artists post y'all would like to see done next?

Unknown artist

slyroon said:
Unknown artist

Now that's a challenge.

slyroon said:
Unknown artist

Mother of Bob!! O^o

slyroon said:
Unknown artist

Grr I tried, but the site kept locking up, and my computer shat itself.

-solo -duo -group could always use work

I'm giving images like post #510212 and post #510217 the tag solo_focus.

-solo -duo -group -solo_focus
couple -solo -duo -group -solo_focus

Also consider tagging solo_focus + group_sex

Consider implication group_hug -> group