The bulk update request #86 has been rejected.

create alias small_breasts (65191) -> a-b_cup (0)
create alias medium_breasts (38924) -> c-d_cup (0)
create alias big_breasts (839211) -> e-g_cup (0)
create alias huge_breasts (327805) -> h-m_cup (0)
create alias hyper_breasts (51397) -> n+_cup (0)

Reason: Considering that the topic of "what would be considered_x" has been an issue for what to tag something for such a long time, I think that re-categorizing to real world equivalents would be more transparent rather than simply having something vague like size words. Though the suggested solution might not be agreed on as far as what the tag should be, I think that this rout for an alias or even an implication to go along with the current size standards i.e. if small_breasts implicated a-b_cup or some other ratio defining tag would clarify what classifies as well. Thoughts?

EDIT: The bulk update request #86 (forum #292477) has been rejected by @Millcore.

I think this would just be exchanging one problem for another, considering how different places have different standards for measurement.

lafcadio said:
I think this would just be exchanging one problem for another, considering how different places have different standards for measurement.

I think it should be at least a unit of measurement range as the amount of poorly categorized images based of personal opinion as to what would classify as big huge ect creates misstagged posts. Where literal size standards set in a range gives a clearer depiction as to what someone would want to see, it would also open the door to being able to rid the hyper > huge > big daisy chain for size categorization

In my tagging experience, I have seen much more untagged breast size posts than I have ever seen wrongly tagged breast size posts. Maybe I'm not seeing the right images, but maybe this isn't as big of an issue that people make it out to be.

I think the tags we have now are perfect and meet all of my tagging needs. Suggesting some kind of cup size standard would not avoid having to use some kind of visual size reference. I'm certainly less familiar with female breast cup sizes, and would need to research to know the difference between a B and a C cup.

I have no idea about what any of those letters mean.
Not that I know a lot about bra sizes in general, but a lot of people in my country seem to prefer the S/M/L/XL/XXL/etc system for the sizes.

thevileone said:
In my tagging experience, I have seen much more untagged breast size posts than I have ever seen wrongly tagged breast size posts. Maybe I'm not seeing the right images, but maybe this isn't as big of an issue that people make it out to be.

I believe it happens more in larger-breast-size posts, as users who don't want to see those are more likely to tag those sizes for more effective blacklisting, while users who actively browse the larger size tags may become frustrated when what they see is smaller than what they think belongs there. Honestly, I think there's less mistagging than there is complaint, as most of what I've seen are angry comments from people (within the latter group) who don't attempt to retag the images.

I'm certainly less familiar with female breast cup sizes, and would need to research to know the difference between a B and a C cup.

genjar said:
I have no idea about what any of those letters mean.
Not that I know a lot about bra sizes in general, but a lot of people in my country seem to prefer the S/M/L/XL/XXL/etc system for the sizes.

By my understanding, each increment in cup size is a one-inch circumference(?) difference between underbust measurement and bust measurement, but my understanding falls apart when you get to the point the letters get double-stacked. eg. I have no idea what the difference is between DD and E
I'm also probably just plain wrong somewhere here as I don't have a personal requirement to understand cup sizes.

But not only do I distrust the userbase's ability to grasp and tag standardised-cup-sizes, I'm not sure how well this would interact with artwork having a much wider potential-range of body sizes than the real-world clothing standardisation system expects to deal with.

magnuseffect said:

But not only do I distrust the userbase's ability to grasp and tag standardised-cup-sizes, I'm not sure how well this would interact with artwork having a much wider potential-range of body sizes than the real-world clothing standardisation system expects to deal with.

zzz is real and mildy horrifying

The bulk update request #86 (forum #292477) has been rejected by @Millcore.