Implicating cock_transformation → transformation
Link to implication

Reason:

Another one is post_transformation but I don't know what it is.

Post_transformation is after the transformation happened. During a longer transformation sequence (over several posts) artists often go by a "formula" that can be summarized like this:

1. pre-transformation - normal person
2. pre-transformation - They drink something or piss off a witch or something.
3-???. Dramatic transformation sequence.
???+1: post_transformation - They're now a bird/dragon/civet cat/etc. and have either come to terms with it already (for some reason) or are grumbling about something minor.

Keanon Woods is pretty well-known for this (see pool #867), though they also do that "mutant middle form without any context" transformation as well.

As for the implication... I'm not sure. On one hand, ~120/195 have both tags anyways. On the other hand, post_vore implies vore though you usually have some more context in those (abdominal_bulge, internal view, etc.). The post_* and imminent_* tags are the only tags I've seen to regularly bend the TWYS rules (even the useful ones), so I'm not sure how I feel about them to begin with.

I'd rather be consistent if possible, but not every one of these are part of a sequence like this (particularly imminent_rape) and treating them consistently would cause a lot of issues with mistagging. I'm hesitant to call this an "exception" to TWYS but that's what it feels like to me, even if they are usually part of pools.

tldr: +1 and tentative +1 for post_transformation.

parasprite said:
Post_transformation

Well... thanks for your explanation. The tag was supposed to be "AFTER transformation" but I just quit when I saw the first few posts, not to mention another food_transformation.

TheGreatWolfgang said:
food_transformation.

Lol, cute.

It can stay.

parasprite said:
Lol, cute.

It can stay.

Yay!
post #578268

This was brought up recently in forum #147601 and denied for the reasons stated there.

Also denied for post_transformation to --> transformation. Because transformation is reserved for when the transformation is actually occurring, and post_transformation usually lacks transformation, it's more about the aftermath, or implying that transformation has occurred, or their feelings about their new state. And there's a reason why that was already decided to not be enough actual transformation for the transformation tag and they came up with a different tag for it. It's related in concept, and should probably be mentioned on the wiki, but it's still not closely enough related for an implication to work between them. Sorry.

furrypickle said:
This was brought up recently in forum #147601 and denied for the reasons stated there.

I can't believe I completely forgot that thread.

parasprite said:
I can't believe I completely forgot that thread.

Well the names for these tags really aren't helping, since it makes it sound super appropriate until you start digging into the definitions of these tags, how they're used and how they relate to each other...and then the idea of implicating them falls apart. The names though, the names make it seem like "wow, why aren't those implicated, I mean they both say transformation in them so that must be an oversight, etc" Not that I can think of any better names for any of these. So I get why it comes up. But I also can't approve it when it does come up. It's just one of those tricky tag situations.