The tag implication #44193 invalid_tag -> youtuber has been rejected.
Reason: MCYT is defined as “Minecraft Youtuber”.
EDIT: The tag implication mcyt -> youtuber (forum #333959) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.
Updated by auto moderator
Topic: [REJECTED] Tag implication: mcyt -> youtuber
Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
you created the definition. Why exactly do we need a subsect for youtubers based off their content choice?
Why not an alias?
post #3313049
A bit of a tangent but what about this is inherently dream_smp related?
Are either of these character depictions inextricably tied to it? If the characters exist elsewhere and it's just a server they both coincidentally play on together, that's not the sole context in which these characters can be beside one another.
Do we really need this tag? and if so, I feel like there could be a better name than "MCYT"
… do we even need the youtuber tag? How is that TWYS? Can we just nuke both of them?
magnuseffect said:
post #3313049
A bit of a tangent but what about this is inherently dream_smp related?
Are either of these character depictions inextricably tied to it? If the characters exist elsewhere and it's just a server they both coincidentally play on together, that's not the sole context in which these characters can be beside one another.
the dude who's got that jotaro drip is a minecraft tuber and i thing is/was associated with dream idk i just saw animatics of his character and saw a guy do a challenge he made
dripen_arn said:
the dude who's got that jotaro drip is a minecraft tuber and i thing is/was associated with dream idk i just saw animatics of his character and saw a guy do a challenge he made
But he's his own person and not inextricable from content from one specific Minecraft server, right? It's like how the Beastars anime being produced under licence by Netflix doesn't give netflix copyright over any element from beastars that they didn't create themselves.
dripen_arn said:
pls keep i don't want to see porn of youtubers because i wasn't expecting anyone would make yiff of a matt rose's lion man for example
strikerman said:
I know it's TWYS, but I appreciate being able to blacklist explicit art about YouTubers (just a boundary I feel weird about crossing).
Okay, I suppose that’s fair. Couldn’t we pick a more general name, though? I mean, I assume it doesn’t really matter if the character in question is a YouTube star or something else, like a tiktok star. Maybe something like social media celebrity? Kinda long, but idk. Something like that.
scaliespe said:
Okay, I suppose that’s fair. Couldn’t we pick a more general name, though? I mean, I assume it doesn’t really matter if the character in question is a YouTube star or something else, like a tiktok star. Maybe something like social media celebrity? Kinda long, but idk. Something like that.
Would YouTube and Twitch even be considered "social media"? I don't think they are. And in either case, what if they're not solely a "social media" celebrity? Or start out as one, but then change careers (e.g. move to movies and reduce their social media presence). Or get disgraced and no longer regarded as a "celebrity", even if they may still be publicly known.
watsit said:
And in either case, what if they're not solely a "social media" celebrity? Or start out as one, but then change careers (e.g. move to movies and reduce their social media presence). Or get disgraced and no longer regarded as a "celebrity", even if they may still be publicly known.
You know it might just be handy to have a catch-all tag for depictions which represent-either through direct visuals or through abstract representationsi.e. a persona or charicature-a real person whose relevance is not limited to furry-specific content.
Perhaps public_figure?
watsit said:
Would YouTube and Twitch even be considered "social media"? I don't think they are. And in either case, what if they're not solely a "social media" celebrity? Or start out as one, but then change careers (e.g. move to movies and reduce their social media presence). Or get disgraced and no longer regarded as a "celebrity", even if they may still be publicly known.
Wikipedia calls it a social media platform.
I’m not married to that name, though. I think it’s too long anyway. I just don’t like limiting it to YouTube as I don’t see how a similar figure on Twitch or Tiktok is any different, and I don’t think we need multiple discrete tags for them.
magnuseffect said:
You know it might just be handy to have a catch-all tag for depictions which represent-either through direct visuals or through abstract representationsi.e. a persona or charicature-a real person whose relevance is not limited to furry-specific content.
Perhaps public_figure?
public figure would work, I think.
magnuseffect said:
You know it might just be handy to have a catch-all tag for depictions which represent-either through direct visuals or through abstract representationsi.e. a persona or charicature-a real person whose relevance is not limited to furry-specific content.
Perhaps public_figure?
That gets kinda sketchy. Where is the line between "being known by some people online" and public_figure? Barack Obama would be a "public figure", but would Markiplier? Tom Fischbach (Markiplier's brother, who he occasionally brings up)? Sonic Fox (which I'm pretty surprised there's no art of him here, unless I'm misspelling his name)? Lockstin? What about people who are in the public eye for a short time, but fade into relative obscurity afterward?
A depiction of a person with a persona/fursona/caricature is simply tagged as that person. A tag like "youtuber"/"social_media_celebrity" is merely describing their current job, and I don't think we need a tag for "a drawn representation of a person" because if a post has depicts a real person it will be a drawn representation 99% of the time. A tag for "a famous person" then gets into the weeds of who determines whether someone's famous enough for using the tag, how famous someone has to be to be tagged as famous.
watsit said:
Sonic Fox (which I'm pretty surprised there's no art of him here, unless I'm misspelling his name)?
A depiction of a person with a persona/fursona/caricature is simply tagged as that person. A tag like "youtuber"/"social_media_celebrity" is merely describing their current job, and I don't think we need a tag for "a drawn representation of a person" because if a post has depicts a real person it will be a drawn representation 99% of the time. A tag for "a famous person" then gets into the weeds of who determines whether someone's famous enough for using the tag, how famous someone has to be to be tagged as famous.
A useful distinction could be whether that person's involvement in the art they're depicted in is voluntary or welcome. Much like Nintendo do not consent to or endorse pokémon or star_fox porn despite being tagged in it. We do already distinguish art that's released directly through rightsholders as official_art.
I'm not suggesting to slap official_art on everyone's commissions, but could there be a tag for when the production of a post is expressly not connected to the individuals it represents?
faucet said:
real_person?
May work for some instances, but it wouldn't work for fursonas or certain caricatures. The artist Toshabi is depicted in various forms, human, pokemon, anthro, feral, etc. Tagging these as "real_person" because it's the per/fursona of a real person doesn't seem right.
magnuseffect said:
I'm not suggesting to slap official_art on everyone's commissions, but could there be a tag for when the production of a post is expressly not connected to the individuals it represents?
Connected in what way? Would gifts or fanart of an artist's persona/fursona count (e.g. when it was made without their knowledge, but given or shown to them afterward, or they happen to find indirectly)? And it wouldn't count if it's an artist's self-representation?
Updated
clawstripe said:
I'd suggest this be rejected (by an admin) and focus on one of the BURs that expand on this subject and are also trying to do things with mcyt. Only one BUR needs to deal with mctv, plus BURs are editable (by clicking on the "bulk update request #" topping the post).
As the original creator of this forum post, I agree completely
The tag implication mcyt -> youtuber (forum #333959) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.