Ok, I know I have recently changed some tags, but I want to know how these posts are marked "not relevant"?
https://e621.net/posts/3290270
https://e621.net/posts/3290261

Wait until it's approved or rejected. You'll see a reason if it gets rejected. Maybe the approver didn't realize it is a goo_creature instead of a human a solo human wouldn't be allowed.

dubsthefox said:
Wait until it's approved or rejected. You'll see a reason if it gets rejected. Maybe the approver didn't realize it is a goo_creature instead of a human a solo human wouldn't be allowed.

I put it as unknown_species initially

junkie555 said:
I put it as unknown_species initially

That shouldn't matter while approving. I am pretty sure the mods don't look into the tags that much, and more at the picture itself.

It kind of does look like a simplified human with circles "for design", I can see why some staff would say they're uncertain on it.

Well, it's all fine now, they're approved now.

dubsthefox said:
That shouldn't matter while approving. I am pretty sure the mods don't look into the tags that much, and more at the picture itself.

Really now? Is that true? Huh, i guess that's why i and probably a few others can get away with tagging shit that's not supposed to

benjiboyo said:
Really now? Is that true? Huh, i guess that's why i and probably a few others can get away with tagging shit that's not supposed to

After you spend a few years fixing tags, you start to realise that some of the worst taggers are the moderators themselves.

benjiboyo said:
Really now? Is that true? Huh, i guess that's why i and probably a few others can get away with tagging shit that's not supposed to

Just search for solo solo_focus, male/male solo, herm -pussy, humanoid anthro solo. They simply can't check every single tag. There are too many posts

benjiboyo said:
Really now? Is that true? Huh, i guess that's why i and probably a few others can get away with tagging shit that's not supposed to

wait a second, what do you mean "not suppose to" do you mean you're intentionally adding tags that aren't meant to be on a post? Or something else?

versperus said:
wait a second, what do you mean "not suppose to" do you mean you're intentionally adding tags that aren't meant to be on a post? Or something else?

Well, not exactly, probably stuff i accidentally, or initially didn't see. But sometimes it's technincally tagging someting beyong TWYS, like subtext/dialogue implications

benjiboyo said:
Well, not exactly, probably stuff i accidentally, or initially didn't see. But sometimes it's technincally tagging someting beyong TWYS, like subtext/dialogue implications

don't use text to tag unless it's tagging dialogue english_text ect.

versperus said:
don't use text to tag unless it's tagging dialogue english_text ect.

So i can't tag something based on statements/implications from IN the image? Like, let's say a character doesn't explicitly state maybe more implied X, but X isn't shown. I can't tag it X?

dubsthefox said:
Just search for solo solo_focus, male/male solo, herm -pussy, humanoid anthro solo. They simply can't check every single tag. There are too many posts

Right, they are human, probably with jobs? Can't be too anal about it ig

wat8548 said:
After you spend a few years fixing tags, you start to realise that some of the worst taggers are the moderators themselves.

Iol, and it seems from versperus and you, it really is the general member's job huh

benjiboyo said:
So i can't tag something based on statements/implications from IN the image? Like, let's say a character doesn't explicitly state maybe more implied X, but X isn't shown. I can't tag it X?

exactly, best example is a character could say "I'm holding a pepsi" but in the image you can't see the pepsi because their hands are off screen. Then you don't tag pepsi, if you come a cross a situation where a character says "I'm male" but the character looks female or ambiguous you tag it as female or ambiguous but you also can tag it male_(lore)

versperus said:
exactly, best example is a character could say "I'm holding a pepsi" but in the image you can't see the pepsi because their hands are off screen. Then you don't tag pepsi, if you come a cross a situation where a character says "I'm male" but the character looks female or ambiguous you tag it as female or ambiguous but you also can tag it male_(lore)

Even if the can is in image, but it's just an outline of a can with no details that outright prove it's pepsi (such as the logo), you can't tag pepsi, just can. The exception to the system is characters and species--if you see a glove coming from offscreen and Princess Peach talking to it calling it Mario, or Ash Ketchum calling it hitmonchan, (I think, could use verification on this) you can tag those. If there's no part of those characters in the image though, then you can't.

furrin_gok said:
Even if the can is in image, but it's just an outline of a can with no details that outright prove it's pepsi (such as the logo), you can't tag pepsi, just can. The exception to the system is characters and species--if you see a glove coming from offscreen and Princess Peach talking to it calling it Mario, or Ash Ketchum calling it hitmonchan, (I think, could use verification on this) you can tag those. If there's no part of those characters in the image though, then you can't.

I'm pretty sure species is a yes and no thing that can: very from post to post