The bulk update request #6180 is active.

create alias hugging_plushie (322) -> plushie_hug (0)
create implication plushie_hug (0) -> plushie (20514)
create implication plushie_hug (0) -> hug (55425)

Reason: the rest of hugging_[noun] tags are aliased to [noun]_hug, this should follow the same formula

EDIT: The bulk update request #6180 (forum #385910) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

If hug counts for objects, what if embrace was used for characters hugging each other and implied hug? Hug would be an umbrella tag for hugging both characters and objects.

You may want to remove the plushie_hug -> hug implication just for now so the simple parts can go through. I support plushie_hug -> hug if we redefine embrace that way, but it may be controversial and will need more discussion.

Actually, embrace and hug are still synonyms and that would still be confusing. Would be better off with hugging_another and hugging_object both implying hug (or embracing_* implying embrace if that's the one we choose).

The bulk update request #6180 (forum #385910) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

wandering_spaniel said:
Actually, embrace and hug are still synonyms and that would still be confusing. Would be better off with hugging_another and hugging_object both implying hug (or embracing_* implying embrace if that's the one we choose).

What's your idea for what to do with hug and embrace? Alias them together, set up hugging object and hugging another? Have hugging_during_sex being what embrace was intended to be previously? I'd support it, given that currently it's a slight mess

snpthecat said:
What's your idea for what to do with hug and embrace? Alias them together, set up hugging object and hugging another? I'd support it, given that currently it's a slight mess

topic #44317
Sorry, forgot to link it before