Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The tag implication #47326 young_male -> young has been rejected.
Reason: seems obvious.
either implicate or -> invalid_tag alias? (because so few posts?)
EDIT: The tag implication young_male -> young (forum #348774) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.
Updated by auto moderator
I think it ought to be aliased away to young rather than implicated as we do with other sorts of gendered tags of this ilk.
I personally don't feel like it would hurt to have this tag, but usually we don't mix stuff that way.
imagine all the 20+ furrie being grouped with cub drawings lol. No dude.
closetpossum said:
imagine all the 20+ furrie being grouped with cub drawings lol. No dude.
I don't think that's meant to be for 20+ furries
Should add a "Not to be confused with younger_male" in the wiki.
It should be aliased to shota.
animperfectpatsy said:
It should be aliased to shota.
That's actually the best way to go. I always forget loli and shota are tags here.
dubsthefox said:
I don't think that's meant to be for 20+ furries
exactly...
animperfectpatsy said:
It should be aliased to shota.
dubsthefox said:
That's actually the best way to go. I always forget loli and shota are tags here.
Note: This should only be tagged for explicit and sexually suggestive content.
animperfectpatsy said:
It should be aliased to shota.
magnuseffect said:
Note: This should only be tagged for explicit and sexually suggestive content.
It turns out, it's not the best way to go.
closetpossum said:
imagine all the 20+ furrie being grouped with cub drawings
Doesn't this statement imply, that you think young_male would be used for 20+ (in age?) furries/characters. Or that you assume it would be misused for 20+ characters?
clawstripe said:
I think it ought to be aliased away to young rather than implicated as we do with other sorts of gendered tags of this ilk.
Seems fair. Should have been my 2nd/other/alternative option instead of "-> invalid" from the start.
And since shota doesn't seem to be an option either...
closetpossum said:
imagine all the 20+ furrie being grouped with cub drawings lol. No dude.
closetpossum said:
dubsthefox said:
I don't think that's meant to be for 20+ furriesexactly...
What? Anyone tell you we can't read your mind and your replies in this thread don't make any sense (at least to me)?
The tag implication young_male -> young (forum #348774) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.
The bulk update request #5342 has been rejected.
create implication young_herm (163) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_maleherm (71) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_andromorph (472) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_gynomorph (471) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_intersex (1202) -> young (238070)
create implication young_intersex (1202) -> intersex (246801)
create implication young_male (44412) -> male (2512939)
create implication young_male (44412) -> young (238070)
create implication young_female (38163) -> female (2555213)
create implication young_female (38163) -> young (238070)
dubsthefox said:
It turns out, it's not the best way to go.
Shota/Loli seem to be body types in future?
(Massive) Shota/Loli cleanup thread Yeah, this one is going to be a nightmare. The half-dozen-topic BUR(n out) is also wearing me down, hehe.
See also: Magical girl/boy, herm/intersex/maleherm/andromorph/gynomorph/neuter equivalents for shotacon/lolicon, and many other related tags.
The cub_* and others are in that 6-part BUR , if I remember right.
:edit: Ugh, somehow orphaned the BUR. And that reply vanished. I'm somehow experiencing all kinds of issues, today. XD I wonder if an admin can add back that description from the BUR.
I thought that decision got flipped because shota tag is such a damn mess.
EDIT: The bulk update request #5342 (forum #372975) has been rejected by @slyroon.
Updated by auto moderator
alphamule said:
:edit: Ugh, somehow orphaned the BUR. And that reply vanished. I'm somehow experiencing all kinds of issues, today. XD
I hid my first reply since you seemed to remove the BUR, making it no longer relevant. Nothing you did caused the reply to disappear, don't worry. Your BUR is still visible in the BUR list, though:
https://e621.net/bulk_update_requests/5342
You should be able to reject it from there.
watsit said:
I hid my first reply since you seemed to remove the BUR, making it no longer relevant. Your BUR is still visible in the BUR list, though:
https://e621.net/bulk_update_requests/5342
You should be able to reject it from there.
It glitched. I don't see how to recover it. :(
alphamule said:
It glitched. I don't see how to recover it. :(
You don't see a button to reject it on the BUR page itself or the BUR list page?
watsit said:
You don't see a button to reject it on the BUR page itself or the BUR list page?
I meant to get it to show up again. But yeah, only reason I submitted that was because of the huge cub_*/*_cub/child_*/*_child/... project basically leading down that path.
A weird side effect of how AIBUR's work is that little text at the top of forum posts is what actually displays them, so if you just add back [bur: 5342] (with no spaces, it'll embed it here if I don't add that space) to the top, it'll show up again
donovan_dmc said:
A weird side effect of how AIBUR's work is that little text at the top of forum posts is what actually displays them, so if you just add back [bur: 5342] (with no spaces, it'll embed it here if I don't add that space) to the top, it'll show up again
I guess the description got eaten, but not really worth the trouble to mess with log, etc. to get it back.
Basically, it seems it's a long time coming with the shota/loli tags. The entire reason I submitted the request was to make it consistent with how the normal intersex implications work. i.e. Herm -> intersex
Then added the split-tag implications for uncombined tags. Shota/loli is going to take a lot of work, no matter what ends up happening, though.
Or maybe I need to reread that Massive topic again, to be sure I'm not misunderstanding things. :(
:EDIT: Started reading and a discussion starting with this reply. Was it intended that it only included male and female variants? That seems odd. young_intersex would include herm/maleherm/andromorph/gynomorph by implication, right?
Updated
alphamule said:
The bulk update request #5342 has been rejected.create implication young_herm (163) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_maleherm (71) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_andromorph (472) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_gynomorph (471) -> young_intersex (1202)
create implication young_intersex (1202) -> young (238070)
create implication young_intersex (1202) -> intersex (246801)
create implication young_male (44412) -> male (2512939)
create implication young_male (44412) -> young (238070)
create implication young_female (38163) -> female (2555213)
create implication young_female (38163) -> young (238070)Shota/Loli seem to be body types in future?
(Massive) Shota/Loli cleanup thread Yeah, this one is going to be a nightmare. The half-dozen-topic BUR(n out) is also wearing me down, hehe.
See also: Magical girl/boy, herm/intersex/maleherm/andromorph/gynomorph/neuter equivalents for shotacon/lolicon, and many other related tags.The cub_* and others are in that 6-part BUR , if I remember right.
:edit: Ugh, somehow orphaned the BUR. And that reply vanished. I'm somehow experiencing all kinds of issues, today. XD I wonder if an admin can add back that description from the BUR.
I thought that decision got flipped because shota tag is such a damn mess.
Ganbatte!
post #391246
animperfectpatsy said:
It should be aliased to shota.
Shota can't be put under safe posts.
wolfmanfur said:
Shota can't be put under safe posts.
so you're saying that saaaay an image where a big mama is saying Ara Ara~ to a clearly shota character
but there's no questionable material, everyone is clothed, and it's idk, at a park...and it can't be under a SAFE post?
I'm sorry but something ain't right about that. Loli and Shota aren't inharently questionable or explicit, it's the art being drawn that depends whether it should be rated accordingly.
I just looked at the tag wiki for Shota and it had no implications that it should be for questionable or explicit in nature until Ratte updated the wiki back in 2017-06-12.
But such content can and should be rated as SAFE if it appears to be SAFE. It's that simple. Like a pic of a shota holding hands with someone.
Are we really going to imply with that wiki that shota & loli by nature are questionable and explicit alone? Are all the tags under them questionable and/or explicit?
I have yet to check admittedly
______________________________________________
EDIT: ...it's like ALL questionable or explicit. I found no SAFE/wholesome posts. Like even the fully clothed ones look sus.
post #3344990
Updated
closetpossum said:
Teal deer
Talk about it with the administrators. This is how they decided those tags were meant to work.
>rejected
So I guess young males are adults then?
closetpossum said:
Ganbatte!
post #391246
LOL
closetpossum said:
so you're saying that saaaay an image where a big mama is saying Ara Ara~ to a clearly shota character
but there's no questionable material, everyone is clothed, and it's idk, at a park...and it can't be under a SAFE post?I'm sorry but something ain't right about that. Loli and Shota aren't inharently questionable or explicit, it's the art being drawn that depends whether it should be rated accordingly.
I just looked at the tag wiki for Shota and it had no implications that it should be for questionable or explicit in nature until Ratte updated the wiki back in 2017-06-12.But such content can and should be rated as SAFE if it appears to be SAFE. It's that simple. Like a pic of a shota holding hands with someone.
Are we really going to imply with that wiki that shota & loli by nature are questionable and explicit alone? Are all the tags under them questionable and/or explicit?
I have yet to check admittedly
______________________________________________
EDIT: ...it's like ALL questionable or explicit. I found no SAFE/wholesome posts. Like even the fully clothed ones look sus.
post #3344990
Meh, this is why there's these topics. Hopefully that gets settled, soon, too. I wonder if part of the reasoning for that was Pixiv or something.
closetpossum said:
so you're saying that saaaay an image where a big mama is saying Ara Ara~ to a clearly shota character
but there's no questionable material, everyone is clothed, and it's idk, at a park...and it can't be under a SAFE post?
I feel like a post where an adult character is coming on to/trying to seduce a young character probably shouldn't be rating:s regardless of setting and how dressed the characters are.
closetpossum said:
I'm sorry but something ain't right about that. Loli and Shota aren't inharently questionable or explicit, it's the art being drawn that depends whether it should be rated accordingly.
I just looked at the tag wiki for Shota and it had no implications that it should be for questionable or explicit in nature until Ratte updated the wiki back in 2017-06-12.
lolicon and shotacon are, by definition, the sexualization of young characters. the "-con" suffix is used to denote a sexual complex around certain things.
the "-con" words are generally used to refer to the person with the complex, so remove that and you have the word for the sexualized character (shotacon==someone who likes shotas, shota==sexualized young(-looking) boy).
sipothac said:
I feel like a post where an adult character is coming on to/trying to seduce a young character probably shouldn't be rating:s regardless of setting and how dressed the characters are.lolicon and shotacon are, by definition, the sexualization of young characters. the "-con" suffix is used to denote a sexual complex around certain things.
the "-con" words are generally used to refer to the person with the complex, so remove that and you have the word for the sexualized character (shotacon==someone who likes shotas, shota==sexualized young(-looking) boy).
you're half right. -con short for complex is someone who DOES have a fixation on a certain thing. But it doesn't have to be in a sexual way, I think you're bastardizing the meaning as what western interpreters usually do of Lolicon & Shotacon.
In comparison, a Siscon or brocon doesn't mean that the sibling wants to have sexual actions with their sister or brother but moreso it means they care heavily about their sister or brother which is usually in a nonsexual way.
There can be flirtations, heavy protectiveness, clinging, groping, cuddling, sleeping with (nonsexually), bathing with (nonsexually), and many other activities done with the person of fixation without it being sexualized.
The problem with the Loli & shota tags is that it's all sexual by nature which basically warps the whole aspect of what a loli-complex & shota-complex is initially
because the people here who consume that tag THINK that is what lolicon & shotacon is all about. The sexualization of the young looking characters.
TL;DR: These people don't friggin watch anime man!
Honestly, I should stop here if people understand, don't want to derail from OG topic
Updated
I have never heard siscon or brocon used in contexts other than when someone wants to fuck their sibling, or, at the very least, really seem like they want to be romantically involved. maybe sometimes it can be used a bit hyperbolically for when a sibling is overbearing, but it is not a word with a positive or even neutral connotation.
I wonder if last 2 replies conflict... because of different communities. I've seen non-porn usage, but I've also seen quite a bit (and yes, it's western people) using it for that.
The bulk update request #5342 (forum #372975) has been rejected by @slyroon.
I'm gonna take this opportunity to remind folks nobody is still using the shota and loli tags correctly.
shota rating:safe loli rating:safe
This is not what the wiki describes how those tags were gonna work and yet they still end up on safe posts.
wolfmanfur said:
I'm gonna take this opportunity to remind folks nobody is still using the shota and loli tags correctly.
shota rating:safe loli rating:safeThis is not what the wiki describes how those tags were gonna work and yet they still end up on safe posts.
why don't you fix it, then?
siral_exan said:
why don't you fix it, then?
For the same reason you won't do it either becourse these tags will get mistagged again when not looked at. To add to that, I can't mass update posts and I don't wanna update hundreds of posts manually. Isn't that a thing privileged users can do?
wolfmanfur said:
For the same reason you won't do it either becourse these tags will get mistagged again when not looked at. To add to that, I can't mass update posts and I don't wanna update hundreds of posts manually. Isn't that a thing privileged users can do?
i did do it (1) (2), though. i did it well before becoming privileged, did it after, and eventually stopped due to private reasons... back to the point, why are you complaining about it becoming a worse and worse problem, if you're not gonna try to fix it? why not just blacklist it instead, or use the time you took complaining to remove a couple posts from that list? shit being mistagged is never gonna stop being a problem, so why not instead be a part of the solution?
