Topic: [APPROVED] Tag alias: watermark_go_brrrr! -> distracting_watermark

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

The tag alias #75364 watermark_go_brrrr! -> distracting_watermark has been approved.

Reason: This tag seems to be used for when there's an excessive number of watermarks on screen. I'm not sure if distracting watermark applies here. Maybe something like excessive_watermarks would. I do know that watermark go brrrr! is a very bad tag name.

EDIT: The tag alias watermark_go_brrrr! -> distracting_watermark (forum #440359) has been approved by @spe.

Updated by auto moderator

All four of those images seem to be blatant advertising, too, which I thought was against the rules. Was there some kind of deal made where Teranen was allowed to post free advertising in exchange for not going full DNP, or something?

errorist said:
All four of those images seem to be blatant advertising, too, which I thought was against the rules. Was there some kind of deal made where Teranen was allowed to post free advertising in exchange for not going full DNP, or something?

advertisements are allowed, but artistic quality must be greater than the advertising

lendrimujina said:
You can say the same about JPEG artifacts.

Which we also allow (up to a point)
There's also another difference, watermarks are usually intentional while artifacting is usually not intentional
Deletions for artifacting alone are rare, we'd usually rather have something in a crusty format than toss it out the window entirely