The tag implication #51377 poison_honeybee_(solo_farming_in_the_tower) -> honey_bee is pending approval.

Reason: they are the same type of species

we don't imply characters to species, since they can be drawn as an alternate_species, someone could cosplay as them without appearing to be their original species, or otherwise have instances where the character's recognizably the character, but not recognizably the species.

siral_exan said:
we don't imply characters to species, since they can be drawn as an alternate_species, someone could cosplay as them without appearing to be their original species, or otherwise have instances where the character's recognizably the character, but not recognizably the species.

character?
these are species

lilyanida said:
character?
these are species

sorry, i originally saw this as the queen bee, but the statement still remains since due to the pokémon logic. pokémon don't imply canine, feline or anything because they, as a species, also act somewhat as characters since they can be cosplayed or otherwise modified but still recognizably be the copyrighted species. typically any species that implies or is tied to a copyright suffers this, once they start acting like a character in the copyright they start getting treated as one on e6.

siral_exan said:
stuff...

my brother in christ its in the name poison_honeybee

lilyanida said:
my brother in christ its in the name poison_honeybee

that doesn't matter. please, cite to me when species names matter in implying a species, and thus overrule the pokémon logic for not implying copyrighted species to general species?

siral_exan said:
not implying copyrighted species to general species?

That's not the logic. charr implicates felid, rito implicates avian, caninu implies canid, tetton implies felid, etc. Pokemon are the odd ones out, which people have regularly questioned why they don't implicate a species (especially when it explicitly says we can tag rodent, canine, avian, etc, for them, we just have to do it manually).

watsit said:
That's not the logic. charr implicates felid, rito implicates avian, caninu implies canid, tetton implies felid, etc. Pokemon are the odd ones out, which people have regularly questioned why they don't implicate a species (especially when it explicitly says we can tag rodent, canine, avian, etc, for them, we just have to do it manually).

those are all species from which characters spring out of. they aren't species who act like characters, they are "just rito" and do nothing but exist or act as world-building tools. once the poison bee starts spitting honey into the protag's drink, once they start adding importance to the story beyond "oh look, a poison honeybee!", they stop acting like just a species and start acting like characters too. pokémon all start doing shit like ferrying kids across water or powering electrical plants or helping excavate caves, they stopped being "oh, just a voltorb" or "oh, just a pikachu" because they became important to the story of pokémon. when you start having an entire species start contributing to the story rather than just one of the species act as it, when you start having all of them show affection to the cast of characters or have them start helping them farm rather than "i exist to show there are bees in this world", then you start being a character rather than just a species. Overlord has lizardmen which can exist as a tag, and then it has specific lizardmen that are important to the story, but not all lizardmen are important to Overlord's story.

however, i will admit that my knowledge of them is limited, i haven't seen much of the comic but i have seen an odd focus on them being important. if they just fucked off after being introduced and it's just one or two poison honeybees sticking around, and not an entire nest meant to represent "the whole species" for a role in the Protag's story, or if the comic is a small part of a greater world and it just so happens to be these honeybees (which then means they need character tags), i will redact this argument. i'm seeing otherwise though.

watsit said:
That's not the logic. charr implicates felid, rito implicates avian, caninu implies canid, tetton implies felid, etc. Pokemon are the odd ones out, which people have regularly questioned why they don't implicate a species (especially when it explicitly says we can tag rodent, canine, avian, etc, for them, we just have to do it manually).

honestly, I'm not sure we should have those other fictional species implied to real species.

from what I understand the main reason we don't with most fictional species is the cosplay problem, for real species (and real-life folklore species) we generally have seperate tags for costumes (and fake ears, etc.) that don't imply the base species. doing this for every pokémon, digimon, etc. would be infeasible.

darryus said:
honestly, I'm not sure we should have those other fictional species implied to real species.

from what I understand the main reason we don't with most fictional species is the cosplay problem, for real species (and real-life folklore species) we generally have seperate tags for costumes (and fake ears, etc.) that don't imply the base species. doing this for every pokémon, digimon, etc. would be infeasible.

i also feel uncertain about these. Skaven, for example, are pretty easily cosplayed as but nobody challenged the implication. it's hard to make this argument when other mascot-ey species get a pass...

really, that's the whole problem here: theoretically any copyrighted species can be cosplayed as, i'm trying to argue that this species is too identifiable with the copyright to not make the implication safe whereas other, even more identifiable species already got the pass.

siral_exan said:
those are all species from which characters spring out of. they aren't species who act like characters, they are "just rito" and do nothing but exist or act as world-building tools. once the poison bee starts spitting honey into the protag's drink, once they start adding importance to the story beyond "oh look, a poison honeybee!", they stop acting like just a species and start acting like characters too. pokémon all start doing shit like ferrying kids across water or powering electrical plants or helping excavate caves, they stopped being "oh, just a voltorb" or "oh, just a pikachu" because they became important to the story of pokémon. when you start having an entire species start contributing to the story rather than just one of the species act as it, when you start having all of them show affection to the cast of characters or have them start helping them farm rather than "i exist to show there are bees in this world", then you start being a character rather than just a species. Overlord has lizardmen which can exist as a tag, and then it has specific lizardmen that are important to the story, but not all lizardmen are important to Overlord's story.

however, i will admit that my knowledge of them is limited, i haven't seen much of the comic but i have seen an odd focus on them being important. if they just fucked off after being introduced and it's just one or two poison honeybees sticking around, and not an entire nest meant to represent "the whole species" for a role in the Protag's story, or if the comic is a small part of a greater world and it just so happens to be these honeybees (which then means they need character tags), i will redact this argument. i'm seeing otherwise though.

As far as I know, whatever distinction you’re making here has never been official in any capacity and was not the reason that pokemon don’t imply other species.

I think you’re letting some obscure technicalities get in the way of a better tagging system. Cosplay has always been in a weird place tag-wise, but I think we really do either need individual cosplay-specific tags for every species and character, or just not tag them at all beyond the base cosplay tag. Or something in between those two - maybe a generic pokemon_cosplay for any Pokémon species. But whatever the solution, we can’t let something as unimportant as cosplay interfere with the usability of the search system. People should be able to expect to find the results that they’re looking for when they search for something. Charizard is a valid result if you’re looking for dragon. Growlithe is a valid result if you’re searching for canid… and so on. People very rarely manually add these tags when uploading, so most Pokémon end up missing the appropriate non-Pokémon species tags. But it doesn’t have to be that way.

scaliespe said:
As far as I know, whatever distinction you’re making here has never been official in any capacity and was not the reason that pokemon don’t imply other species.

I believe that this statement from furrypickle on the subject coincides with what siral_exan is saying. although that statment is specifically for pokémon, this rule is generally also extended to digimon and some similar species.