The bulk update request #8036 is pending approval.

Reason: There's a few pride color BURs floating around but a lot of them want to reorganize the entire tag structure and haven't really gone anywhere. This BUR is just straightforward and just implies missing LGBT+ identities with posts featuring their pride colors to pride_colors. It shouldn't touch on anything controversial.

Also aliasing grayromantic_pride_colors to match greysexual_pride_colors.

A lot of these feel too niche to me, and that it makes the tag not really that useful when so many are lumped under it that are so far from the core group.

rainbow_dash said:
A lot of these feel too niche to me, and that it makes the tag not really that useful when so many are lumped under it that are so far from the core group.

I mean, most of these seem to be within the realm of orientation and gender identity.

although, saying that, "aegosexual" does not really "feel" like an orientation to me, and "aplatonic" seems... weird.

rainbow_dash said:
A lot of these feel too niche to me, and that it makes the tag not really that useful when so many are lumped under it that are so far from the core group.

This doesn't make any sense to me. These are pride colors used for less common LGBT identities, how does it make the tag for LGBT pride colors "less useful" to add implications to them? They quite literally fall under the purpose of the tag, and they're only niche because they're less common identities.

We shouldn't get into the territory of arguing what constitutes a valid label. We're a furry artwork site.

What if we left this tag for the "core" identities and made a separate tag for "niche" identities?

scaliespe said:
What if we left this tag for the "core" identities and made a separate tag for "niche" identities?

How does one determine what's "core" and what's "niche", especially without coming off as insensitive? :P

It just doesn't sound neutral or fair to arbitrarily section off some labels into a "niche" tag. Seems like a mess waiting to happen.

To be clear, my interest in these tags is mostly based in an interest in vexillology and not personal identification, but I just don't see how this distinction would be in any way beneficial.

nimphia said:
This doesn't make any sense to me. These are pride colors used for less common LGBT identities, how does it make the tag for LGBT pride colors "less useful" to add implications to them? They quite literally fall under the purpose of the tag, and they're only niche because they're less common identities.

We shouldn't get into the territory of arguing what constitutes a valid label. We're a furry artwork site.

Agreed. Also these different flags will still exist regardless of our personal feelings about them.

scaliespe said:
What if we left this tag for the "core" identities and made a separate tag for "niche" identities?

what purpose would this serve? pride colors are pride colors, If someone wants to see one of the major ones they can search for that specifically.

_{And the people who blacklist pride_colors definitely don't want to see these ones :/}

nimphia said:
How does one determine what's "core" and what's "niche", especially without coming off as insensitive? :P

It just doesn't sound neutral or fair to arbitrarily section off some labels into a "niche" tag. Seems like a mess waiting to happen.

To be clear, my interest in these tags is mostly based in an interest in vexillology and not personal identification, but I just don't see how this distinction would be in any way beneficial.

I mean I feel like we ought to at least keep it in the same few domains that pride covers normally.

like, "aplatonic" seems to mean "not having an interest in forming friendships", which really does not seem like it has anything in common with other pride stuff.

nimphia said:
How does one determine what's "core" and what's "niche", especially without coming off as insensitive? :P

It just doesn't sound neutral or fair to arbitrarily section off some labels into a "niche" tag. Seems like a mess waiting to happen.

Which raises the question, what should the cutoff be? Or do we tag/implicate everything and anything that someone says is <something>_pride_colors to avoid being arbitrarily selective?

pleaseletmein said:
_{And the people who blacklist pride_colors definitely don't want to see these ones :/}

watsit said:
Which raises the question, what should the cutoff be? Or do we tag/implicate everything and anything that someone says is <something>_pride_colors to avoid being arbitrarily selective?

I mean, we have to make the cutoff somewhere, because, like, we're obviously not going to imply every tag labled *_pride_colors to pride_colors just so blacklists work, because I can think of at least two things under there that nobody wants to have those associated with pride.

dba_afish said:
I mean I feel like we ought to at least keep it in the same few domains that pride covers normally.

like, "aplatonic" seems to mean "not having an interest in forming friendships", which really does not seem like it has anything in common with other pride stuff.

Right, some of these are definitely stretching the very idea of 'pride'.

Can we at least approve the definitely-not-niche stuff like the aroace colors?

strikerman said:
Can we at least approve the definitely-not-niche stuff like the aroace colors?

Who's going to be deciding what's niche or not? Because I'd never even heard of aroace prior to opening this thread, I wouldn't call it "core"

I'm with Nimphia & Wandering Spaniel on this one - if something is *_pride_colors and has any significant usage I don't see why it shouldn't imply pride_colors (apart from obvious memes like tax_evasion_colors) or how we'll even define what is a "core" identity. Is e621 going to gatekeep what are "true" LGBT identities? I really don't understand what the intentions behind this are.

faucet said:
Who's going to be deciding what's niche or not? Because I'd never even heard of aroace prior to opening this thread, I wouldn't call it "core"

when people say LGBTQIA+, that's the A

strikerman said:
when people say LGBTQIA+, that's the A

I thought A was Allies?

watsit said:
I thought A was Allies?

I think this is the first time hearing this misconception.

strikerman said:
when people say LGBTQIA+, that's the A

Well, that's asexual, not aroace, then after that is aromatic (fragrant). But let's not trouble ourselves with the initialism and the problems that come with choosing where to slap the +

dba_afish said:
I think this is the first time hearing this misconception.

I would say it's a relatively common misconception

snpthecat said:
aromatic (fragrant).

my brain is so fucked right now that I can't tell if you're memeing.

I genuinely did not expect this to be this controversial... I removed aplatonic :P

pleaseletmein said:
what purpose would this serve? pride colors are pride colors, If someone wants to see one of the major ones they can search for that specifically.

_{And the people who blacklist pride_colors definitely don't want to see these ones :/}

If they fall under the 'protected tag' categories, then yeah, I agree full heartedly. Best to put them all under the same tag, not only to make it easier to manage, but like you said, to help users with the blacklisting.