The tag alias #54617 blushing_profusely -> blush has been rejected.

Reason: This is the same thing, just with added subjectiveness.

EDIT: The tag alias blushing_profusely -> blush (forum #317952) has been rejected by @SnowWolf.

Maybe this isn't really the right tag for it since the current usage is a mess of regular blushing posts, but I do think there should be a tag for when characters are blushing a lot. For example, the difference between these two images is easily visible and non-subjective.

post #2347201

vs

post #2966174

There is a heavy blush tag. Currently it's written to include "Very deep color" but I think that part should be removed;
post #2759481
it's very subjective what counts as a "deep color", while the blush here is solid (I could support a solid_blush tag), it doesn't look deep or heavy.

It looks like blushing_profusely has about 800 uses now. My thought would be to alias heavy_blush to blushing_profusely, then imply blush.

any disagreements?

if cleanup of blushing_profusely needs to happen, it should be able to happen after without an issue.

snowwolf said:
It looks like blushing_profusely has about 800 uses now. My thought would be to alias heavy_blush to blushing_profusely, then imply blush.

any disagreements?

if cleanup of blushing_profusely needs to happen, it should be able to happen after without an issue.

Even though blushing_profusely has received more usage, I prefer the opposite direction:

create alias blushing_profusely -> heavy_blush
create implication heavy_blush -> blush
create implication light_blush -> blush

• I think most other emotive gerunds (e.g., blushing, sweating, grinning, frowning, laughing) alias to their noun counterparts (blush, sweat, grin, frown, laugh), and it makes sense to me that an extreme version of blush should be a heavy_blush.
• If blushing aliases to blush, then it makes sense to keep that pattern instead of mixing standard nouns like blush with gerunds like blushing.
• heavy_blush is the opposite of light_blush whereas it's not clear what the opposite of blushing_profusely would be. blushing_lightly?

monroethelizard said:
Even though blushing_profusely has received more usage, I prefer the opposite direction:

create alias blushing_profusely -> heavy_blush
create implication heavy_blush -> blush
create implication light_blush -> blush

• I think most other emotive gerunds (e.g., blushing, sweating, grinning, frowning, laughing) alias to their noun counterparts (blush, sweat, grin, frown, laugh), and it makes sense to me that an extreme version of blush should be a heavy_blush.
• If blushing aliases to blush, then it makes sense to keep that pattern instead of mixing standard nouns like blush with gerunds like blushing.
• heavy_blush is the opposite of light_blush whereas it's not clear what the opposite of blushing_profusely would be. blushing_lightly?

I think this will work best too.

The tag alias blushing_profusely -> blush (forum #317952) has been rejected by @SnowWolf.

Excellent points.

After a quick look, this is what I have:

create alias blushing_profusely -> heavy_blush
create alias slight_blush -> light_blush
create alias blushy -> blush
create alias blushed -> blush
create alias blush_face -> blush
create alias facial_blush -> blush
create implication heavy_blush -> blush
create implication light_blush -> blush
create implication full-face_blush -> blush

New tags involved:
slight_blush, blushy, blushed, blush_face, facial_blush, full-face_blush

Please, if something looks dumb, let me know. I don't have a lot of experience with BURs and could be being stupid. <3

<shakes the thread gently>

snowwolf said:
<shakes the thread gently>

Etchachacha?
post #2421702

(Admittedly no blush, though.)