Topic: Conditional tags should be basic features for the sake of sexual minorites.

Posted under Site Bug Reports & Feature Requests

Conditional tags should be a basic feature. This feature being missing from basic accounts is unfair to people of sexual minorities who's user experience may be negatively impacted by the inability to combine tags. For example, the only existing way to blacklist solo tags with the exception of female is [if male, -solo]. I'm personally a lesbian and having this show up by surprise can sour the mood significantly.

Without a separate tag for the solo gender variants, people are entirely unable to separate images that may make them uncomfortable as sexual minorities.

fizzwizard said:
For example, the only existing way to blacklist solo tags with the exception of female is [if male, -solo]. I'm personally a lesbian and having this show up by surprise can sour the mood significantly.

Well isn't that the reason the blacklist exists? So you can blacklist content you do not wish to see? There's way too many people out there to account for all to have simple toggles because someone will always feel left out, so just using the blacklist is probably the best idea.

donovan_dmc said:
This isn't how the blacklist or searching works. That's tag scripting (bulk editing posts), something normal users rightfully don't have access to. We have a Blacklist Help Page, and a Search Help Page.

Thank you. It was difficult to find the black listing information compared to the script editing. While trying to find a way to black list conditionally, I came across tag scripts first. Under tag scripts, it is noted that the purpose of them is to "change tags." This was confusing for me, because "change tags" does not necessarily imply "for editing posts" at face value. It may seem obvious to some, but for others the indirect implication could be confusing.

I didn't initially think to look in Blacklist Help because the issue was concerning the use of tags. It registered to me as a use of tags first, and the blacklist second. It may be helpful to add a link or something to the Tag Scripts page with something like, "Looking for conditional black listing? Check Blacklist Help" so that users who are unfamiliar with where to look will be redirected without making the same mistake I did, or needing to ask for help/a change.

cinder said:
Why are you making another topic about this? topic #42299

I made the first post before I found the Tag scripts, which I misidentified as the conditional tagging function in general due to confusion regarding whether conditional tags were a tags problem first, or a black list problem first. "Change tags" could also mean "change how tag works," which is where I was confused, so I made a new forum post to adjust for it. I had a hard time finding the post to edit when looking up "forum posts made my be" in my account menu. Apologies.

definitelynotafurry4 said:
Well isn't that the reason the blacklist exists? So you can blacklist content you do not wish to see? There's way too many people out there to account for all to have simple toggles because someone will always feel left out, so just using the blacklist is probably the best idea.

Yes. It was unclear to me whether the issue was a tagging function first or a blacklist function first. All the other tagging instructions are under one of the "Tag" labeled help FAQs/instructions, so since I was using tags I figured that was where I would find a conditional function. "Change tags" registered to me as changing how the tag searches, which was a misinterpretation, but one I clearly needed help here to redirect to the right FAQ for the job. It may seem like a no-brainer for someone who frequently interacts with comments, forums and has a lot of experience on the site, but I'm a more casual user and for me this wasn't quite so obvious unfortunately. That isn't to say it was a bad thing, just an accurate recounting of how I ended up from one place to the next.

solo -female

Edit: And now I've seen the other thread. Whoops. Well, if anyone stumbles on this one in the future, there you go.

  • 1