The tag implication #63851 presenting_balls -> presenting is pending approval.

Reason: presenting is a general tag for a character presenting some body part, in this specific case, their balls.

See topic #44936

snpthecat said:
See topic #44936

I didn't even notice it didn't even imply balls.

Massive overlap with presenting_hindquarters or presenting_penis, plus some content that's just rear_view backsack without any presenting. And in most posts, something else is being presented and balls just happen to be in view, which misses the point of the tag group. Is this even needed?

I can find only a handful posts — such as post #2185223 and post #1868496 — that fit the proper presenting usage. So technically valid, but that's a pretty terrible rate of mistags.

genjar said:
So technically valid, but that's a pretty terrible rate of mistags.

A tag that is valid, but mistagged should not be invalidated or lack implications due to userbase error.

There are a lot of mistags. The implications themselves are probably fine, though - while many of these posts are not specifically presenting the balls (most of it seems to be presenting_hindquarters or presenting_penis and the character happens to also have balls though they’re not the focus), at the very least, the vast majority of these are some form of presenting, so this implication will add very few mistags. The implication to balls is a little less certain as some of those posts are merely balls_outline due to clothing, but it’s still a small minority overall. Even if the balls aren’t being presented in many of those cases, they are at least visible most of the time.

The tag itself is a mess, but in this case it doesn’t bear too much on the implications. The real question is, what do we do with this tag? I don’t think we can just get rid of it entirely - presenting balls is a real thing and people need to have a way to be able to search for or blacklist it. I’m wondering if it’s actually bad enough that it might be easier to comb through the tag for the valid uses and then just nuke it and start over? We’ll have to actually try to maintain it though, which may be an uphill battle. So many people are apparently tagging under the assumption that presenting_balls is nothing more than presenting + balls, regardless of what is actually being presented, which is annoying.

scaliespe said:
...

Perhaps we can have a generic presenting_bulge (238 uses atm, no wiki) for outlines/bulges? It'd probably be way too specific to go into the type of bulge in the tag, but it can be combined with presenting_bulge balls_outline or something along those lines. The main issue would be what are we gonna do with pussy_outline since it isn't a bulge? It'd be weird to have a presenting_bulge but not a similar tag for camel toes or something. Perhaps just presenting_camel_toe (49 uses, no wiki)?

Something like

imply presenting_balls -> presenting
imply presenting_balls -> balls
imply presenting_bulge -> presenting
imply presenting_bulge -> bulge
imply presenting_camel_toe -> presenting
imply presenting_camel_toe -> camel_toe

and then before it's accepted do some clean up of the posts and some wiki work?

tarrgon said:
Perhaps we can have a generic presenting_bulge (238 uses atm, no wiki) for outlines/bulges?

Oof. That is far from the original intention of the presenting tag group: posts where anatomy is presented in such blatant way that there's no question that the character is offering sex. As someone put it back then, 'just stick it in.'

Incorporating types of presenting where clothing is actually valid would muddle this to the level where it'd probably be impossible to keep in order, since then pretty much any pinup and seductive pose can be argued to be 'presenting'. I think those would be better off in some other tag group, just for the sake of tagging sanity.

Perhaps presenting_crotch? That would cover bulges and camel toes, and featureless crotches. Though that seems to get misused for unclothed and non-featureless crotches too...

genjar said:
Oof. That is far from the original intention of the presenting tag group: posts where anatomy is presented in such blatant way that there's no question that the character is offering sex

post #4803048

What would you call this, then?

Perhaps not the best example, but the most recent that one could assume for this tag, though I personally wouldn't call this presenting due to the expression.

There are numerous skirt lift pieces that are provocatively presenting the genitals through underwear (bulges) that do coincide with your definition, though. But perhaps the issue is with the base presenting tag not being general enough. Presenting is a very broad concept, and the definition we have for it is very limited that makes mistags very common because, well they're correct by every other human definition of the word. Perhaps, presenting is just a bad tag for its defined use.

tarrgon said:
post #4803048

What would you call this, then?

More of a pinup than presenting. Even disregarding the unsure expression, there's the extra step of having to remove clothing, etc. Can't just 'walk over and stick it in, no questions asked', hence not presenting.

I guess presenting_balls needs clearer tagging criteria. I mean, I guess presenting_X is kind of unclear.

crocogator said:
I guess presenting_balls needs clearer tagging criteria. I mean, I guess presenting_X is kind of unclear.
What's being presented? Hindquarters? Penis? Balls? All of the above?

The original idea was to go with presenting_hindquarters for these 'presenting the whole package' ones. Possibly with added presenting_anus, though that has its redundancies.
Whereas presenting_balls (and presenting_penis) should be specifically for presenting that specific part, rather than them just being visible. Because the latter's true for 99% of male presenting, which makes those tags pointless when used that way.

Maybe shaking their balls also counts, but that inherently shakes their butt and penis too, so...

More of a whole package deal again in that animation. Balls are just hanging there, what's being presented is the hindquarters.