post #5053223
(I'm surprised there isn't a sticky thread for one-off tagging questions like this.)

People typically use the #tag-discussions channel in the Discord for such things.

reginaldludwig said:
Should post #5053223 be tagged with the_silence_of_the_lambs?

You are asking that question now after you had added the tag yourself and somebody else removed it for being irrelevant?

What part of the post screams that it is a The Silence of the Lambs reference? The butterfly on the face?
Would it be more likely the artist just simply drew butterfly_on_nose rather than made a reference to a horror movie poster from the 90s?

1. that's not a Death Head Hawk Moth on that post

2. even if it were that moth, not every appearance of a Death Head is an automatic Silence of the Lambs reference

thegreatwolfgang said:
You are asking that question now after you had added the tag yourself and somebody else removed it for being irrelevant?
What part of the post screams that it is a The Silence of the Lambs reference? The butterfly on the face?
Would it be more likely the artist just simply drew butterfly_on_nose rather than made a reference to a horror movie poster from the 90s?

Yes. One person (me) thought it should be tagged, one person thought it shouldn't. We needed a third opinion.
You almost seem offended. What would you suggest, a tag war?
I didn't give my reasoning in the hopes of getting an unbiased response (that didn't really work out, lol), but since you asked, yes, it's the butterfly, it's the same color and it's covering the character's mouth in the same way as the very famous poster, and the theme of the comic (especially that last panel) is silence.
But if you think there's no way this could possibly be a reference, I'm not going to fight it. I'm open to being proven wrong here, that's why I asked.

reginaldludwig said:
Yes. One person (me) thought it should be tagged, one person thought it shouldn't. We needed a third opinion.
You almost seem offended. What would you suggest, a tag war?
I didn't give my reasoning in the hopes of getting an unbiased response (that didn't really work out, lol), but since you asked, yes, it's the butterfly, it's the same color and it's covering the character's mouth in the same way as the very famous poster, and the theme of the comic (especially that last panel) is silence.
But if you think there's no way this could possibly be a reference, I'm not going to fight it. I'm open to being proven wrong here, that's why I asked.

It feels incredibly petty when you refused to accept the reason it got removed in the first place.
It made me feel that this entire thread was made after the fact so that you can validate an edit you had made that got removed weeks ago.

Nobody ever thought this was a Silence of the Lambs reference.
Not the artist, not the original tagger, and none of the audience.
Only you managed to draw this far-fetched connection.

thegreatwolfgang said:
It feels incredibly petty when you refused to accept the reason it got removed in the first place.

The reason was pretty minimal:

who tf tagged this with silence of the lambs just because there's a butterfly...

I think it's a fair question to ask because it is a rather iconic imagery from popular media, a spread-winged butterfly on the lips covering the mouth as if to make someone silent, not just "there's a butterfly". They obviously thought of it when they saw it, hence the tag being added initially, and when someone removed it, they came here to ask.

Is it not an acceptable practice to ask if a tag should apply to a post when there's disagreement? It's not like that have a record/history of tagging far-out things on posts and making forum posts complaining when others remove their tags. That tag was also the last thing they added to a post 2 months ago, before making more changes today, which suggests they haven't been around and only recently came back and noticed it. It seems to be a legitimate question.

watsit said:
Is it not an acceptable practice to ask if a tag should apply to a post when there's disagreement? It's not like that have a record/history of tagging far-out things on posts and making forum posts complaining when others remove their tags. That tag was also the last thing they added to a post 2 months ago, before making more changes today, which suggests they haven't been around and only recently came back and noticed it. It seems to be a legitimate question.

I would apologise if my first comment came off as being brash, as even I find the connection to be absurd and very loose.
However, at this point, 3 different people have said that it is not Silence of the Lambs reference and they replied with "prove me wrong here".

thegreatwolfgang said:
However, at this point, 3 different people have said that it is not Silence of the Lambs reference and they replied with "prove me wrong here".

That's not how I read it.

I didn't give my reasoning in the hopes of getting an unbiased response (that didn't really work out, lol), but since you asked, yes, it's the butterfly, it's the same color and it's covering the character's mouth in the same way as the very famous poster, and the theme of the comic (especially that last panel) is silence.
But if you think there's no way this could possibly be a reference, I'm not going to fight it. I'm open to being proven wrong here, that's why I asked.

They gave their thought processes on why they originally thought it was a reference (since others wanted to know why they thought it was), but is someone who's open to being wrong, which is why they made the topic asking if they were. They were shown they're wrong, and they're not fighting it.

thegreatwolfgang said:
It feels incredibly petty when you refused to accept the reason it got removed in the first place.

Tell me, in general, what the best practice is when two people disagree on something like this, because when I started this thread, it was just me and the other guy.
You object to me using a forum post to ask others about it. What should I have done differently?
You say I should've just accepted the reason given by the user who removed the tag - but (in general) they're just as likely to be wrong as I am; there's no way for either of us to just know that the other is correct, after all, we disagree with each other.
So again, please explain the best practice without referencing this specific case (you've already made your opinion on that quite clear).
I've accepted the consensus over the tag in question here (if that wasn't obvious), but I need to know what to do for the next time.

As an aside: there's another, very well-known collaborative internet project, where they've determined that the optimal process is to just go ahead and make whatever changes you think will improve things, and if someone else reverts those changes, you have an open discussion that anyone else can participate in. It's worked out pretty well for them.
Hence my surprise that there isn't a dedicated thread or subforum for this kind of thing; apparently there's something on the discord.
And yes, you're being very brash and aggressive and I'm not sure why.

reginaldludwig said:
Tell me, in general, what the best practice is when two people disagree on something like this, because when I started this thread, it was just me and the other guy.
You object to me using a forum post to ask others about it. What should I have done differently?
You say I should've just accepted the reason given by the user who removed the tag - but (in general) they're just as likely to be wrong as I am; there's no way for either of us to just know that the other is correct, after all, we disagree with each other.
So again, please explain the best practice without referencing this specific case (you've already made your opinion on that quite clear).
I've accepted the consensus over the tag in question here (if that wasn't obvious), but I need to know what to do for the next time.

As an aside: there's another, very well-known collaborative internet project, where they've determined that the optimal process is to just go ahead and make whatever changes you think will improve things, and if someone else reverts those changes, you have an open discussion that anyone else can participate in. It's worked out pretty well for them.
Hence my surprise that there isn't a dedicated thread or subforum for this kind of thing; apparently there's something on the discord.
And yes, you're being very brash and aggressive and I'm not sure why.

It is fine to create topics like this if you genuinely have a tagging question that warrants further discussion, or just ask on the Discord # tag-discussions channel.

If you want tips for improvement, do mention you added the tag and the reason you added it. Also, explain why you don't think the tag removal is warranted and am currently seeking for a second opinion.
Since you did not acknowledge both of this in the first place, it felt really disingenuous and this was just made to seek for validation (thus my brash response). I apologise if that is not your intent.

We don't usually do in-depth discussions for every tag edit.
You can just make the edit as you see fit, ideally with a reason. If it gets reverted by someone, you read their reason and determine whether or not it makes sense.
If it does not make sense to you, you can re-add the tag again and include your counter-reason. If it gets reverted for a second time, then you can ask for staff to make a judgement (which often results in tags getting locked).

thegreatwolfgang said:
you can re-add the tag again and include your counter-reason.

I thought you should instead report the post for tagging abuse and get the mods to determine. Rather than readding the tag and continuing the tag war

snpthecat said:
I thought you should instead report the post for tagging abuse and get the mods to determine. Rather than readding the tag and continuing the tag war

That's why I said to read the reason and determine if it makes sense or not.
You are allowed to reinstate tags that are invalidly removed.

If you want to report posts for tag abuse after the first revert, that is fine as well but not necessary in most scenarios.