The bulk update request #4589 has been rejected.

Reason: If these are considered valid tags, then it would be very handy to add implications for them to cover the elements included in these tags so one could just use the specialized tags and have the site automatically add the other relevant tags. There are also similar things for younger/older, and I might have to split this up due to the limit.

EDIT: The bulk update request #4589 (forum #363434) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4591 has been rejected.

Reason: additional implications for BUR

EDIT: The bulk update request #4591 (forum #363436) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4592 has been rejected.

Reason: more BUR entries

EDIT: The bulk update request #4592 (forum #363437) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4593 has been rejected.

Reason: More BUR entries

EDIT: The bulk update request #4593 (forum #363438) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4594 has been rejected.

Reason: More BUR entries

EDIT: The bulk update request #4594 (forum #363439) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4595 has been rejected.

create implication larger_ambiguous_smaller_maleherm (0) -> larger_ambiguous (3543)
create implication larger_ambiguous_smaller_maleherm (0) -> smaller_maleherm (51)
create implication larger_male_smaller_ambiguous (1) -> larger_male (96676)
create implication larger_male_smaller_ambiguous (1) -> smaller_ambiguous (7147)
create implication larger_female_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> larger_female (60750)
create implication larger_female_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> smaller_ambiguous (7147)
create implication larger_intersex_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> larger_intersex (7158)
create implication larger_intersex_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> smaller_ambiguous (7147)

Reason: More BUR entries

EDIT: The bulk update request #4595 (forum #363440) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4596 has been rejected.

create implication larger_andromorph_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> larger_andromorph (112)
create implication larger_andromorph_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> smaller_ambiguous (7147)
create implication larger_gynomorph_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> larger_gynomorph (6037)
create implication larger_gynomorph_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> smaller_ambiguous (7147)
create implication larger_herm_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> larger_herm (628)
create implication larger_herm_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> smaller_ambiguous (7147)
create implication larger_maleherm_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> larger_maleherm (23)
create implication larger_maleherm_smaller_ambiguous (0) -> smaller_ambiguous (7147)

Reason: More BUR entries

EDIT: The bulk update request #4596 (forum #363441) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

Might it be more efficient to split them into their component parts and remove the combined tags? For example, rather than larger_male_smaller_male being tagged, instead tag larger_male and smaller_male while getting rid of the longer tag? Searching for larger_male_smaller_male would provide nearly the same results as larger_male + smaller_male. The latter, more modular tag scheme would allow larger_male to combine with all the other smaller_X (and smaller_male with all the other larger_X) while using fewer tags and implications.

The longer approach requires 54 tags (all larger_X_smaller_X tags), using 108 implications to 14 tags (and then someone would have to go through all the other tags to properly fill out the longer tags). The modular approach requires 14 tags (7 larger_X tags and 7 smaller_X tags), using no implications (and no need to figure out who goes to what longer tag).

I'd argue it's better to just manually split apart the four longer tags that are currently in use into their component parts. Unfortunately, we can't easily alias them away since aliases can only be aimed at one target tag.

clawstripe said:
Might it be more efficient to split them into their component parts and remove the combined tags? For example, rather than larger_male_smaller_male being tagged, instead tag larger_male and smaller_male while getting rid of the longer tag? Searching for larger_male_smaller_male would provide nearly the same results as larger_male + smaller_male. The latter, more modular tag scheme would allow larger_male to combine with all the other smaller_X (and smaller_male with all the other larger_X) while using fewer tags and implications.

Yes, this is my suggestion. <sex>_something_<sex> tags result in an excessive number of combinations and implications, especially when considering the intersex umbrella, when more often than not, separate <sex>_something and something_<sex> is just as good and much more manageable.

watsit said:
Yes, this is my suggestion. <sex>_something_<sex> tags result in an excessive number of combinations and implications, especially when considering the intersex umbrella, when more often than not, separate <sex>_something and something_<sex> is just as good and much more manageable.

The problem is, larger_male gets tagged on tons of non-size difference posts featuring fat men, and smaller_male is yet another weapon in the TWYS cub war. We need to have tags that make the comparison explicit.

The bulk update request #4596 (forum #363441) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4595 (forum #363440) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4594 (forum #363439) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4593 (forum #363438) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4592 (forum #363437) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4591 (forum #363436) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.

The bulk update request #4589 (forum #363434) has been rejected by @Rainbow_Dash.