Do I just, write it in? Do I just make it? Or does it have to be approved by an admin first? Would it be considered tagging abuse for making an unapproved tag?

Yes, you can just add a new tag that you think is appropriate to a post.
No, it does not have to be approved by an admin.

You should make sure that the tag does not exist already under a different name, though.
Plus, the tag should be both helpful and appropriate to the post.

If you are unsure about a tag, you can ask either here on the forums, or in Discord.

bitwolfy said:
Yes, you can just add a new tag that you think is appropriate to a post.
No, it does not have to be approved by an admin.

You should make sure that the tag does not exist already under a different name, though.
Plus, the tag should be both helpful and appropriate to the post.

If you are unsure about a tag, you can ask either here on the forums, or in Discord.

Thank you. I was thinking about adding a tag called "Anthro_dominating_human" and "human_dominating_anthro." Trust me, I've tried to look for tags that refer to that, and I've tried combining certain tags to create the result that this tag would come up with, but nothing works. I'll get to working on it! Thank you.

bitwolfy

Well! It seems someone has started the Anthro_Dominating_Human tag! But still no Human_dominating_Anthro tag... I'll get to working on adding both tags to relevant posts!

sputty said:
Thank you. I was thinking about adding a tag called "Anthro_dominating_human" and "human_dominating_anthro." Trust me, I've tried to look for tags that refer to that, and I've tried combining certain tags to create the result that this tag would come up with, but nothing works. I'll get to working on it! Thank you.

Why not just use submissive_human + anthro for the former and submissive_anthro + human for the latter?

bitwolfy said:
Why not just use submissive_human + anthro for the former and submissive_anthro + human for the latter?

That includes anthro-on-anthro stuff with a human in the background, like post https://e621.net/posts/2667079, and vice versa.

sputty said:
That includes anthro-on-anthro stuff with a human in the background, like post https://e621.net/posts/2667079, and vice versa.

Sometimes a few false-positives are alright, as long as the majority of posts are still relevant. Keep in mind all the different forms (anthro, feral, human, humanoid, etc) that would need to be included with both x_dominating_y and y_dominating_x tags, and how many posts will end up missing those tags because people don't know to use them. If the tags don't get used enough, you'll not get all the results you want from searching the tag, resulting in having to use a slightly more generic search still anyway.

bitwolfy said:
Why not just use submissive_human + anthro for the former and submissive_anthro + human for the latter?

anthro_on_human submissive_anthro and anthro_on_human submissive_human will bear fewer false-positives by clarifying that you'll have them paired together.
post #2549073
Of course, you can still get some false positives, like this showing up in the submissive_anthro field when the anthro is with another anthro, with a submissive_human with a separate anthro.

watsit said:
Sometimes a few false-positives are alright, as long as the majority of posts are still relevant. Keep in mind all the different forms (anthro, feral, human, humanoid, etc) that would need to be included with both x_dominating_y and y_dominating_x tags, and how many posts will end up missing those tags because people don't know to use them. If the tags don't get used enough, you'll not get all the results you want from searching the tag, resulting in having to use a slightly more generic search still anyway.

They don't inflate tags so long as they're only used on posts that demonstrate the activity. Having all "x_dominating_y" tags would make searching (and blacklisting) easier, and they would only be as prevalent in tagging as the post illustrates it. I can't see how creating these tags would do anything but make e621 easier and more friendly to use.

furrin_gok said:
anthro_on_human submissive_anthro and anthro_on_human submissive_human will bear fewer false-positives by clarifying that you'll have them paired together.
post #2549073
Of course, you can still get some false positives, like this showing up in the submissive_anthro field when the anthro is with another anthro, with a submissive_human with a separate anthro.

That's a good combination of tags. Thank you for pointing that out. I swear I tried that and wasn't satisfied with the search results before... They're better now, but I still think that dedicated tags have their role. Say, if you wanted to exclude multiple tags from a search, like you didn't want to see submissive anthros with humans, but still wanted to see submissive anthros with anthros. That kind of thing.

sputty said:
Having all "x_dominating_y" tags would make searching (and blacklisting) easier, and they would only be as prevalent in tagging as the post illustrates it. I can't see how creating these tags would do anything but make e621 easier and more friendly to use.

If they're not widely used on posts they would qualify for, blacklisting the tags wouldn't be effective, and searching for them would cause the user to miss a bunch of posts they expected to see. This creates a false sense of functionality, as a user would want to take the easy path of blacklisting/searching those specific tags, but not getting the expected results. The search/blacklist would seem flaky and ineffective, which does not make the site easier or more friendly to use.