The tag implication #47442 stuck -> bound has been rejected.

Reason: This is a weird one, since I already know that this implication isn't exactly correct. But it needs to be out there.

We currently define being bound as being “limited in motion by non-living things.”

There are few scenarios where a character that’s correctly tagged as being stuck won’t also be bound, but they do exist, which might cause problems with this implication. All of the ones I’m aware of are reliant on the ‘non-living’ requirement. ex: The character is stuck halfway inside a tree, like post #3664906.

It’ll take a bit before this implication can be added, though, as this tag is often misused. It might be advantageous for this to be an alias instead, just so there’s less opportunity for misuse.
-Some taggers add stuck just because a character says the word “stuck”, like in post #3688776
-Despite the description of stuck clearly stating it doesn’t necessary include knotting, several images use it anyways.
-It’s also sometimes used instead of restrained, like in post #3664606.

All I know is, I’m definitely not patient enough to fix the tags on a total of 68 pages with 50 posts each. (Generated with the search stuck -bound -restrained)

EDIT: The tag implication stuck -> bound (forum #350231) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.

This is an interesting discussion. However, I disagree with the implication and would rather recommend a tagging project for this.

One case that I immediately think from these grounds, are cases of micro_on_macro, especially when the macro character isn't (completely) noticing the micro character. For example the micro character in post #3611921 is clearly stuck (though not tagged so), although not bound or grabbed and thus not restrained.

I actually ran into this proposal/discussion, as I was looking if there is anything going on about the ~600 restrained_arms, which should be changed into arm_grab or arms_tied depending of if it is a case of being restrained or bound respectively. There are challenges in doing this, in cases where arms clearly are forcibly held – unseen behind the character's back, but it's not clear if another character is just restraining them, or if they have been bound.

Further question: Things fastened by magnetic forces (especially living magnets), spider web and glue. Should they be tagged as bound, restrained, or what? Someone suggested stuck in Discord, but the wikipage on that doesn't really go well with these.

I would say the obvious distinction between these two tags is intent. Like, characters don't (even in porn) usually tie their own hands together, but a character getting stuck while trying to climb through a hole is such a common scenario I'd feel weird aliasing it together with the former case.

urielfrys said:
Further question: Things fastened by magnetic forces (especially living magnets), spider web and glue. Should they be tagged as bound, restrained, or what? Someone suggested stuck in Discord, but the wikipage on that doesn't really go well with these.

Those all seem straightforward cases of bound to me, unless the living magnet is itself the thing that's stuck (to a non-sentient object).

In summary (may not reflect actual current wiki and/or usage):

• restrained: Character can't move because someone is holding them.
• bound: Character can't move because someone is using something to hold them.
• stuck: Character can't move because something is holding them.

maskedstranger said:
-Despite the description of stuck clearly stating it doesn’t necessary include knotting, several images use it anyways.

Except in the case of a knotted_glory_hole.

The tag implication stuck -> bound (forum #350231) has been rejected by @gattonero2001.