Just now, I hear this on another topic [ https://e621.net/forum_topics/32477?page=1#forum_post_327945 ],
And I am imagining Alias request will be New Feature with Multiple Options.

... But, My Logical-thinking and Explanation-skills are (a bit) lacking, sadly ； I need different viewpoint of everyone.
Plus, There might be better different concept.

Therefore, I would like to ask for everyone's wisdom - What is your opinion ?　I am now trying to give my own opinion.

～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
Before : On The current Alias request → There is only one "To" tag.

The tag alias # 12345　AAAAA (from) -> BBBBB (to)　is pending approval.

Reason: (( Why the OP decided to make this ))
👍😕👎

After : Here is my own opinion/concept → The "To" will have two or more multiple options of tags.

The tag alias　# 12345　of　boss_monster　is pending approval.

This has multiple options, and You can decide preferred one Only.
Reason: (( Why the OP decided to make this ))

Options ｜ Agree with: caprine 👍　undertale 👍　invalid_tag 👍　｜　😕:neutral/thinking　｜　👎:disagree

• 👍＝ +1/YES , 😕= neutral/thinking , 👎= -1/NO/Do-Nothing
• Options must disappear after you choose Agree/Thinking/Disagree ＝ Saying YES to something is the same as saying NO to something else = If the voter chooses one of the options, it will be explicitly regarded as if the others were Not chosen.

～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～～
IMO, It'll be useful for single 'From' Alias/Implication ONLY. 　And This will save the time of requesters, voters, and Admins, in the future.

This all looks terribly confusing. Perhaps if someone made a concept of what a BUR like this would look like it could become much clearer?

hexen said:
This all looks terribly confusing. Perhaps if someone made a concept of what a BUR like this would look like it could become much clearer?

I've made my concept now.　And I said, I was "trying to give my own opinion" ... 🙄

kurogi_foxsiv said:
And I said, I was "trying to give my own opinion" ... 🙄

Just so there's no misunderstanding, by "terribly confusing" I meant that I'm too silly to understand such ideas without having a visualization.

Now that I see the concept it seems like a pretty neat idea, but I wonder if it's wise to intermingle such functionality with BURs/aliases/implications. I have to assume that those are actual database queries so they would have to be converted to the standard A -> B format before application anyway. Perhaps a separate "micro-poll" functionality would serve better.

No, that is why BURs exist, so that they can be edited as discussion happens.
Single alias/implication suggestions should be kept simple as it is, with a single yes/maybe/no vote.
The discussion following that should clarify which tags should be used instead and is then suggested in a separate alias/implication request (or edited into the BUR itself).

The reason behind that is so that admins can pass the whole alias/implication/BUR suggestion through the system easily, and not have to deal with checking individual options for every single suggestion out there.
In addition (if I'm looking at this feature through BURs), users can edit their options which would break voting altogether.

hexen said:
Just so there's no misunderstanding (...)

No, I'm more silly, Because my writing And visualization skills are lacking, Don't even notice my mistakes until a while after I made them. ¯\_(・ω・)_/¯
Indeed, It should be treated as a different new feature with a different name.　

thegreatwolfgang said:
No, it sounds like a good idea in theory but (...)

As for me,

• The concept should be limited to Single 'From' Alias Only --- Even if the OP user were to edit it, the damage would be minimal. Though, it would be better to redo it than to edit it...
• It should Not be applied to Multiple 'From' Bulk --- It'll be a huge mess, indeed.

thegreatwolfgang said:
No, that is why BURs exist, so (...)

I grasped what was going on a little.
But to be honest, My "time" is a little short right now, to get the information about it, to organize my thoughts, and to make my vision to guess the results better.
Until that is resolved, I will refrain from answering Yes or No, To avoid me saying inappropriate things as a discussion.　Sorry.

EDIT : If possible, maybe someone with a lot of knowledge and other viewpoints could find out what the problem is and find a solution.

Howdy.
This fox walked around thinking about this.　Yes, I am lacking understanding for this.
And finally, I could Not decide Yes-or-No for the opinion of @TheGreatWolfgang yesterday (( >> No, that is why BURs exist ... )).

I don't have Experiences, Knowledge and a Good-Viewpoint.
That said, It is Not my intention to let this concept sink into Sands-of-time.

～～～～～～～～～～
So anyway, I'll just leave my all questions here so I don't forget my memories, For now. ：

• #A1 : Is my concept necessary for BUR with multiple "From → To"s？

　→　I would say NO. Probably it's Not.

• #A2 : In BUR, I should switch my vote to agree When I can agree with All of "From → To"s

　→　Is this okay？

• #B : About Alias/Imp. with Single "From"s But Multiple "To"s (( From → To#1, To#2 ... ))

→ What would be the difference between "Yes/Maybe/No" vs. "Multiple Options"？：

• #B1 : Convenience？

　→　In my concept, even if a new option is added -- New Vote can be regarded as a Rejection/No for others, Explicitly and Actively.

• #B2 : Having/Adding a separate Alias/Imp on the same Topic is good？

　→　Maybe it's good.　But, I wish if All requests were shown at the very Top of Topic, Everyone could easily see only That-One, to know the status of discussion...

• #C : In case my concept is Not introduced ：
• #C1 : If I want to switch Alias/Imp. to BUR, Should I stop and restart it as BUR myself？

　→　I'd probably say YES.

• #C2 : Is it possible to check the status of pending Topics through the system ... For users？ (( Number of Votes ... ))

　→　No, I haven't found it.

• #C3 : For users, Is there a way to search for a Topic that is Joined-But-Pending , or Voted-But-Pending？

　→　Mmm, I haven't found it.

• #C4 : In case having a separate Alias/Imp on the same Topic, How can a user know that？

　→　Sorry, I haven't found for this one too -- But though, An active user may find it easily, I think...

I have no Knowledges what I should do in these cases.
But if I don't know forever, I will get into trouble in the future ... Likely. ... In case if I myself am going to be a suggestor？

kurogi_foxsiv said: . . .

Alright, I'll try to answer some of these.

#A1 I would say your concept is not really necessary.
In fact, it has been proposed to straight up replace both alias and implication requests with BURs.

#A2 If you don't agree with any part of a BUR, you should vote 😐 or 👎 and leave a comment. The creator of the request might adjust it based on your feedback, or tell you why they think it should remain the same. Either way, it's progress.
But if you completely agree with all of the parts of a BUR, I do not see why you wouldn't vote 👍.

#B It's impossible to have an alias with multiple "To"s. Implications can do that, though.
Votes are advisory – I do not have to follow the community's opinion on these matters. I almost always do, but occasionally I come across a heavily downvoted alias request that would work just fine if it was reversed. So, I flip it around and approve it.
... maybe we need a fourth voting option: "Reverse the request". Hmm.

#B2 I do think that it would be a good idea. I have asked for something like this before. It reduces forum clutter and lets us keep the discussion in one place, instead of spreading it around across multiple threads.

#C1 Yes, probably. If you have multiple requests on the same subject, just use a BUR.

#C2 There isn't a way to do that for admins either.
I don't handle requests from the forum. I look through the pending aliases and implications requests.
I do check the votes and read through the comments when I handle one, though.

#C3 Again, no. Sorry.

#C4 If an alias you created complains about transitives (example: alias #56688), that means that there are other requests in the system interfering with it.
Also, if you try and create an alias or implication that has already been requested, the system will stop you.
The meta-search shows active aliases and implications for a tag, although it does not display pending ones. Unfortunately.

bitwolfy said:
#B It's impossible to have an alias with multiple "To"s. Implications can do that, though.

Hot take: it should be possible. Like, how many complaints would be stopped if solo_male would auto-expand to solo male whenever tagged or searched?

bitwolfy said:
... maybe we need a fourth voting option: "Reverse the request". Hmm.

Also "Change to implication/alias" for the many cases where users accidentally create the wrong one. Of course, often in real-world scenarios it turns out the correct request is already pending, and this one only went through in the first place because of the mistake, so there'd need to be some kind of conflict handling.

bitwolfy said:
The meta-search shows active aliases and implications for a tag, although it does not display pending ones. Unfortunately.

Also unfortunately, it doesn't show all of them if there are more than 25.

wat8548 said:
Hot take: it should be possible. Like, how many complaints would be stopped if solo_male would auto-expand to solo male whenever tagged or searched?

Sure, but implementing it is not as simple as just removing the restrictions on requests.

wat8548 said:
Also "Change to implication/alias" for the many cases where users accidentally create the wrong one. Of course, often in real-world scenarios it turns out the correct request is already pending, and this one only went through in the first place because of the mistake, so there'd need to be some kind of conflict handling.

Maybe?
IMHO, if you feel if (for example) an alias request should be an implication instead, you should just downvote the original request and make your own.
If the request already exists, you could just link to it in a comment.

wat8548 said:
Also unfortunately, it doesn't show all of them if there are more than 25.

That is indeed very unfortunate.