The bulk update request #57 is active.

create implication egg_in_ass (935) -> egg_insertion (3599)
create implication egg_in_mouth (268) -> egg_insertion (3599)
create implication egg_in_pussy (423) -> egg_insertion (3599)
create implication egg_in_slit (13) -> egg_insertion (3599)
create implication egg_in_cloaca (0) -> egg_insertion (3599)
create implication egg_in_urethra (150) -> egg_insertion (3599)
create implication egg_in_nipples (40) -> egg_insertion (3599)
create implication egg_from_ass (663) -> oviposition (11174)
create implication egg_from_mouth (63) -> oviposition (11174)
create implication egg_from_pussy (1299) -> oviposition (11174)
create implication egg_from_cloaca (117) -> oviposition (11174)
create implication egg_from_urethra (151) -> oviposition (11174)
create implication egg_from_ovipositor (271) -> oviposition (11174)
create implication egg_from_nipples (39) -> oviposition (11174)

Reason: Subtags for all the various forms of egg insertion and egg laying, accounting for the direction. egg_in_slit doesn't have an egg_from_* equivalent because I can't think of any way that could happen (though I've been surprised before by how creative some people can be). _nipples is made plural by convention (as with cum_in_nipples).

Not sure about oral_oviposition and urethral_oviposition, since those tend to be tagged regardless of direction. I'll probably have to do that one by hand for it to be aliased later.

I was going to ass all those aliases too, but the bulk update request system doesn't like how some of those are nearly empty:

alias butt_egg -> egg_from_ass
alias nipple_oviposition -> egg_from_nipples
alias anal_egg_insertion -> egg_in_ass
alias oral_egg_insertion -> egg_in_mouth
alias vaginal_egg_insertion -> egg_in_pussy
alias egg_from_nipple -> egg_from_nipples
alias egg_in_nipple -> egg_in_nipples

EDIT: The bulk update request #57 (forum #290932) has been approved by @Millcore.

Couldn't the various egg_in_* tags indicate an egg simply being in the orifice, rather than being inserted? e.g. egg_in_mouth for a character that's holding an egg in their mouth, without it being pushed in. It also feels like the various egg_in_* tags could be confused for an egg_from_* tag. e.g. an egg just starting to come out of a pussy could be considered egg_in_pussy+oviposition to a laytagger. An egg being in an orifice could be going in, coming out, or staying put.

Similarly, butt_egg doesn't indicate whether it's going in or out, just that there's a butt and an egg together. Also, since the butt tag generally refers to the butt cheeks rather than the anus/ass, it could mean an egg being held in between the butt cheeks, neither going into or out of the anus/ass.

I think it might make more sense to simply have oviposition and egg_insertion tags for an egg coming out or going in, and egg_insertion could be combined with a penetration tag for the various orifices (e.g. egg_insertion+anal_penetration for an egg going into the ass). Alternatively, I'd suggest reversing the insertion aliases (e.g. egg_in_mouth -> oral_egg_insertion) to make it clear it means the egg is being inserted, rather than simply being in.

watsit said:
Couldn't the various egg_in_* tags indicate an egg simply being in the orifice, rather than being inserted? e.g. egg_in_mouth for a character that's holding an egg in their mouth, without it being pushed in.

I guess that's a "hole vs cavity" problem. I'd agree with you that "in" might not be the most descriptive word for this, and *_in_orifice tags all tend to conflate in and from to a certain degree, but there wasn't really any obvious counterrpart to egg_from_* I could think of, and that's after asking a few other users about it for feedback.

It also feels like the various egg_in_* tags could be confused for an egg_from_* tag. e.g. an egg just starting to come out of a pussy could be considered egg_in_pussy+oviposition to a laytagger. An egg being in an orifice could be going in, coming out, or staying put.

I guess that's always going to be an issue with still images, yeah :/

Similarly, butt_egg doesn't indicate whether it's going in or out, just that there's a butt and an egg together. Also, since the butt tag generally refers to the butt cheeks rather than the anus/ass, it could mean an egg being held in between the butt cheeks, neither going into or out of the anus/ass.

Butt egg was a poorly named tag for what should probably have been named anal_oviposition from the start, and I say that being myself guilty of having tagged a few dozen posts with it myself for lack of a better tag.

I think it might make more sense to simply have oviposition and egg_insertion tags for an egg coming out or going in, and egg_insertion could be combined with a penetration tag for the various orifices (e.g. egg_insertion+anal_penetration for an egg going into the ass). Alternatively, I'd suggest reversing the insertion aliases (e.g. egg_in_mouth -> oral_egg_insertion) to make it clear it means the egg is being inserted, rather than simply being in.

-1 for letting users combine generic tags, I find that to be very rarely reliable when searching. oral_egg_insertion and the like would probably get the point across better than egg_in_mouth, though I find them a bit verbose.

fifteen said:
-1 for letting users combine generic tags, I find that to be very rarely reliable when searching.

Interestingly, the existing tags seem a bit inconsistent in this regard. For instance, penis_in_mouth is aliased to oral, while others like penis_in_pussy and dildo_in_ass are not aliased to vaginal and anal. The non-aliased ones are all under 1K tags, so it might be because they weren't widely used enough to be noticed. Either way though, I think it should be consistent whether <thing>_in_<orifice> (or the alternative form <orifice>_<thing>_insertion) should be their own tags with appropriate implications, or if separate <thing>_insertion+<orifice>_penetration tags are preferred. I can see pros and cons to both.

Trying to sort out the contents of the existing tags (namely oral_oviposition), I actually find it more difficult to tell appart tentacles delivering eggs into someone's mouth from the tentacles simply bulging due to fluid passing through it than I find it to tell appart what direction the eggs are meant to be going.

watsit said:
Interestingly, the existing tags seem a bit inconsistent in this regard. For instance, penis_in_mouth is aliased to oral, while others like penis_in_pussy and dildo_in_ass are not aliased to vaginal and anal. The non-aliased ones are all under 1K tags, so it might be because they weren't widely used enough to be noticed. Either way though, I think it should be consistent whether <thing>_in_<orifice> (or the alternative form <orifice>_<thing>_insertion) should be their own tags with appropriate implications, or if separate <thing>_insertion+<orifice>_penetration tags are preferred. I can see pros and cons to both.

I agree with you that the expressiveness of a tag's name will definitely affect how people use it, and that <thing>_in_<orifice> has a bunch of varying interpretations, which would go against the idea of separating those egg-laying tags by direction (I personally believe that egg_insertion and oviposition are separate, if overlapping, fetishes). One of the benefits of the setup I'm suggesting are that egg_in_* and egg_from_* mirror each other (mouth/ass/pussy/urethra/etc.), whereas oral_egg_insertion would follow a different nomenclature (oral/anal/vaginal/urethra/etc.) which might run into some tricky cases ("cloacal" is fine, I suppose, but what about egg_in_slit?).

And I really think that combining tags like egg_insertion and *_penetration would be insufficent, especially given how often egg_insertion is paired with tentacles. post #1831829 comes up when looking for urethral_penetration egg_insertion despite not qualifying for egg_in_urethra, because while urethral penetration is happenning, it is entirely unrelated to the eggs.

The bulk update request #57 (forum #290932) has been approved by @Millcore.

auto_moderator said:
The bulk update request #57 (forum #290932) has been approved by @Millcore.

Oh, cool! Guess I can just file the aliases separately, now.