Say, a drawing doesn't have death in it, but does imply it or there is death in a comic series, but it hasn't happened yet. It cannot be tagged death and thus it cannot be blacklisted. I think all sensitive subjects should have a lore tag for the purpose of blacklisting it.

Take as an example:
death_(lore)
vore_(lore)
murder_(lore)
rape_(lore)

Or, at the very least, many of the implied_* tags should be unaliased. implied_vore and implied_death for example.

I'm not optimistic for it being possible in the codebase, but this sounds more like a job for being able to tag a pool.

This sounds like a bad idea. The current system isn't perfect, but it gets the job done.

Would the imminent_death imminent_rape and imminent_vore tags not cover these scenarios?

thelibertineyeen said:
Would the imminent_death imminent_rape and imminent_vore tags not cover these scenarios?

No. If it already happened, but is not shown, then it will be wrong. if it hasn't happened yet, but there's no indication it's imminent then it's gonna be wrong also.

magnuseffect said:
I'm not optimistic for it being possible in the codebase, but this sounds more like a job for being able to tag a pool.

Yeah, it would be great to have pool tags for common topics folks might find disturbing or to add as a content warning of some sort.

wolfmanfur said:
No. If it already happened, but is not shown, then it will be wrong. if it hasn't happened yet, but there's no indication it's imminent then it's gonna be wrong also.

Yeah, it would be great to have pool tags for common topics folks might find disturbing or to add as a content warning of some sort.

Lore tags are meant for stuff that TWYS can’t tag accurately on a singular post like incest, age, and gender. Pretty sure they aren’t intended to be trigger warnings ala Twitter.

werideatdawn said:
Lore tags are meant for stuff that TWYS can’t tag accurately on a singular post like incest, age, and gender. Pretty sure they aren’t intended to be trigger warnings ala Twitter.

They would be tagged on singular posts too. There are a few where death and vore aren't valid as tags, but it's implied to have had happened lore-wise. Or, unaliasing implied_vore and implied_death could work.

If this is to make sure people know what a comic is about before reading it, maybe a good solution in the meantime is just to make sure the description of the first page and the pool description (pools have descriptions right?) both have the appropriate warnings
+1 for unaliasing implied_death and implied_vore

cloudpie said:
If this is to make sure people know what a comic is about before reading it, maybe a good solution in the meantime is just to make sure the description of the first page and the pool description (pools have descriptions right?) both have the appropriate warnings
+1 for unaliasing implied_death and implied_vore

yes, pools can have descriptions. you can also create or edit pool names to include information like content warnings, though IDK the etiquette of that.

siral_exan said:
yes, pools can have descriptions. you can also create or edit pool names to include information like content warnings, though IDK the etiquette of that.

Feels like common sense. Clyndemoon or Faithry or Fuf or InfinityDoom comics should be pretty obvious tags in comic descriptions. However, not if you've never read them! XD
Clyndemoon's have horrible genital violence. Faithry (RIP) published the bondage/body-modification/SCIENCE comics. Fuf's are so very much cubs and toxic levels of cuteness. Also, ferals. InfinityDoom's have gore and mutilation related tags because a violent comic. There's a ton of artists that do specific subjects that are applicable to this topic.

https://e621.net/pools/24682 It mentions right in the pool description that it involves sexual violence, as example of description with warning.

werideatdawn said:
Lore tags are meant for stuff that TWYS can’t tag accurately on a singular post like incest, age, and gender. Pretty sure they aren’t intended to be trigger warnings ala Twitter.

I'm second guessing myself here so I searched the forum, and this particular reply gives me pause.

Father/son warning here - I removed m/m and incest from this since the father shows no arousal and there is no m/m interaction. Was I correct to do so, or is the artist warning enough to justify the incest lore tag? I'm almost positive m/m didn't belong there, but I want to be certain I was right on removing incest.

Post in question:
https://e621.net/posts/4108781

zeorp said:
I'm almost positive m/m didn't belong there, but I want to be certain I was right on removing incest.

Incest is sexual activity between family members. If it's not male/male it can't be incest, and if it is incest it would have to be male/male. I think removing male/male (and incest) would be correct in that post since the father isn't being sexual with the son, and he isn't aroused or showing any indication of sexual tension between them.

We currently have people using "young (lore)" to bypass blacklists of objectionable content, and mods are locking changes to the keywords to cover them.

lotsa_spaghetti said:
We currently have people using "young (lore)" to bypass blacklists of objectionable content, and mods are locking changes to the keywords to cover them.

If you don't like the admins' ruling on a tag lock decision the the answer is not removing valid tags, vandalizing post descriptions, and calling people diddlers in edit reasons, and then going on to complain about it in random unrelated forum threads like a child.

Going off topic but

sipothac said:
removing valid tags

young_(lore) :
This should not be added to:

Images where the artist claims they're of-age

Vandalising the description after already getting a record for messing with the same post today is sure something, but the lore tag may still be incorrect there.