Conker said:
No one is arguing, we are having a discusion. Now what "many people"? Can you name any of them?

Also we dont bend tag what you see. Lastly Ed didnt make the rule tag what you see, that rule has been here longer than they have.

you fail to catch my point, the discussion was brought up and the admins said what they will, and they ARE the admins. Frankly I'm unbiased as to whether pinkamena tag stays. I do however think that a character_variant tag would basically resolve the issue and be a good tag in general, but that's not for me to decide.

Honestly I feel like if this scenario were to happen with anything besides mlp people wouldn't care so much.

@Gilda The Gryphon
That's what the WIKI is for....

Many before me has already said it more times than me that it has a function of classifying character in a different light which people may like or dislike (i.e sad, gore, psychotic, devoid of joy and yes Straight hair)

You should know that one. Those tags were aliased because they are consider offensive, because they mean underage and in most cases, human type characters. That would have brought to many odd eyes here and since this is a furry site. Aliasing them to cub would be easier than fighting the demons that come knocking for those who host loli and shota. Look at FA

Compared to her original state? Yes their is a identifiable difference, the straight here is not as bad as superman's glass and curly hair change and until Fluttershy gets turn into a dude in a episode, I don't care what Butterscotch says.

But their is one constant in every interpretation that are tag pinkamena. They all have straight hair.

How many of them were kept for their function??

I don't really think of Molestia being a actual character but more of a running gag. But if the comic start poking fun at Molestia style jokes or Celestia's hair turning grey, heaven help us.

Yes I said that. You know why? Because their is always some that hates something for their own preference. As I said, Human nature. The ability to hate just because you don't like the way something is, is your right so is the right to try to destroy it. That's how arguments start, that's how fights start and that's how wars start.

So go for it, scream at the tower of babel about this tags uselessness. Maybe it well fall someday.

@Sollux

The character_variant tag was a good idea. But as you can see that not what they care about. Even tho it would give a alternate solution to a problem they are perpetuating.

You should know that one. Those tags were aliased because they are consider offensive,

...

...

...

WHAT?

No, sorry that doesn't make any sense. Moving on to next line.

Compared to her original state? Yes their is a identifiable difference, the straight here is not as bad as superman's glass and curly hair change

You forgot the one thing that is actually (no matter what Rainbow Dash claims) tagged by superman tag. Costume.
post #286812
If superman was about a character then this pic wouldn't get superman tag. It gets it because it's about costume.

But their is one constant in every interpretation that are tag pinkamena. They all have straight hair.

And as I said before having you hair cut doesn't make you a different character. Again use pinkie_pie straight, and I don't care that you get a lot of false positives. Same goes for people who search female tiger to search for female tiger. Tags are for narrow your search, not to make your all searches perfect.

Also, if you say that Pinkamena tag is only defined by straight hair you seem to be in minority among its proponent here. All admins are saying something about her distinct personality, or something. I don't know what they mean too, but this is what they are saying.

I don't really think of Molestia being a actual character but more of a running gag

Well, EDF doesn't seem to care that you think that Molestia case is different than Pinkamena. To be honest I agree with EDF. Both Pinkamena and Molestia are just stupid memes. If we tag one of them then we should tag another. I just don't agree that this tag should exist. It should be deleted like all others.

BTW, please insert quotes when you're quoting. It's difficult to read like that.

Falord said:

You should know that one. Those tags were aliased because they are consider offensive, because they mean underage and in most cases, human type characters. That would have brought to many odd eyes here and since this is a furry site. Aliasing them to cub would be easier than fighting the demons that come knocking for those who host loli and shota. Look at FA
...

Yeah, look at how quickly Inkbunny died off.
And y!gallery, and e-hentai, and 4chan, and rule 34 they all allow shota and/or loli, and look at what happened to them.

Butterscotch said:
I can't believe I still get/got quoted even though I already left this discussion lol.

Falord said:
@Gilda The Gryphon
That's what the WIKI is for....

Many before me has already said it more times than me that it has a function of classifying character in a different light which people may like or dislike (i.e sad, gore, psychotic, devoid of joy and yes Straight hair)

You should know that one. Those tags were aliased because they are consider offensive, because they mean underage and in most cases, human type characters. That would have brought to many odd eyes here and since this is a furry site. Aliasing them to cub would be easier than fighting the demons that come knocking for those who host loli and shota. Look at FA

Compared to her original state? Yes their is a identifiable difference, the straight here is not as bad as superman's glass and curly hair change and until Fluttershy gets turn into a dude in a episode, I don't care what Butterscotch says.

But their is one constant in every interpretation that are tag pinkamena. They all have straight hair.

How many of them were kept for their function??

I don't really think of Molestia being a actual character but more of a running gag. But if the comic start poking fun at Molestia style jokes or Celestia's hair turning grey, heaven help us.

Yes I said that. You know why? Because their is always some that hates something for their own preference. As I said, Human nature. The ability to hate just because you don't like the way something is, is your right so is the right to try to destroy it. That's how arguments start, that's how fights start and that's how wars start.

So go for it, scream at the tower of babel about this tags uselessness. Maybe it well fall someday.

@Sollux

The character_variant tag was a good idea. But as you can see that not what they care about. Even tho it would give a alternate solution to a problem they are perpetuating.

Wiki, huh? Mark: "This wiki doesn't exist yet." or looks up more images of Mark, and sees a ozen images of the character they know, but more images of a smattering of other characters, also named Mark. Confusingly, one of the other characters is the same Mark, but he's called MarkyMark and has a short stripe of white in his hair. Now, even though there's only one character in the image, Mark, and he just looks a little different, he's called MarkyMark because of that slight hair discolouration, and also Mark, because it's the same character. So, two characters are tagged in that image, mark and MarkyMark. Further, there's an artist named MarkyMark. He drew the original Mark, who is a friend's character, but a different artist (the artist who drew the original Mark's friend) drew MarkyMark. So now, because Mark is drawn by MarkyMark, even if the tag gets altered to be Mark_(MarkyMark) to showcase that he's the copyright owner for the artwork, the fact that there's also the character tag MarkyMark on it because the character owner gave him a nickname because of the hair stripe menas that anyone looking at these images without knowing all this background information that is in no way shown in the image and thus isn't available for TWYS will be utterly confused.

Regarding shota and loli, they were aliased to the young tag, not because they were offensive, but because loli and shota are young+female and young+male combined, respectively. So we got rid of them. Same with straight_shota, underage, teen, and others; It didn't matter if the subject was furred or not, if they met the age or looked like they met the age they had one of these tags slapped on them. Cub is kept as a separate young furry characters tag that implies young (which is a general catch-all for all underage characters) that can be used across all the variants of young animal types (foal/filly/kitten/puppy/etc.) but not for human children. unsure why baby and child are kept specifically, but that's stuff I never really look at anyways, so, there's that.

Straightened hair is not enough of a reason to keep a tag that means (character)+straight_hair. Even then, a considerable number of images are so poorly tagged they don't even have straight_hair tagged when they're tagged Pinkamena. That seems to tell me that it doesn't even occur to people tagging to tag straight_hair, because it's not a big factor to the character that the fanon name means to them.

I don't hate ponies, and I don't hate pony art, or even hate the pony fandom. What I do hate is sloppy tagging practices, normally strict rules being treated lackadaisically for one specific tag (if an exception is going to be created, apply it equally), and a glut of any fandom's fandom all up in my face, regardless of what fandom it is. Some tags make sense, like pokephilia, since a -philia is a "love of ____" where ____ is the prefix; in this example, the "poke" (and screw the accented e. >_>). If someone were to introduce a ponyphilia, I'd correct it to hippophilia (the proper term for a love of horses), and ensure it was being used to represent the same situations pokephilia is except in relations to horses, but otherwise be perfectly fine with it. Others, like Scootabuse, Scootalove, Scootaffection, Scootahate, and others (and there were PLENTY of others... ugh) that just conflate some aspect that is already tagged with something else properly are just trash tags that need to go the same way that shota and loli went. Pinkamena, any personality traits aside which we don't tag unless they have an obvious physical aspect that we can relate to (see: angry and furrowed brows and mouth twisted down into a deep angry frown or open wide with teeth variably clenched or open to allow for shouting), effectively means Pinkie_Pie+straight_hair. That is just like shota (young+male) or loli (young_female) as noted above. It should go the same way that they did.

Additionally, I've already said that the character_variant tag was a good idea to start at since it resolves issues on both sides and is a fair compromise, but that if it just drops all variants into a single tag then they cannot be separately searched for, which doesn't resolve the issue of searchability. I've also suggested a variant on this, that involves a separate catagory for fanon names like Pinkamena, so that they can be tagged in the Fanon/Fandom catagory but not simply as a character name, which would allow any fandom that has a secondary name for a canon character to name it as such; no one addressed that. So, please double-check your points before accusing like that.

123easy said:

I've already said that the character_variant tag was a good idea to start at since it resolves issues on both sides and is a fair compromise, but that if it just drops all variants into a single tag then they cannot be separately searched for, which doesn't resolve the issue of searchability. I've also suggested a variant on this, that involves a separate catagory for fanon names like Pinkamena, so that they can be tagged in the Fanon/Fandom catagory but not simply as a character name, which would allow any fandom that has a secondary name for a canon character to name it as such; no one addressed that. So, please double-check your points before accusing like that.

I misread your post a little bit, but I don't see it reducing search ability by much, having pinkie_pie + character_variant might have some false positives but I don't see it being a very big problem.
when you say fandom name tag, you mean like alternate_name? That would specifically cover things like molestia, pinkamena, futashy etc. Right? I could see that working.

Sollux said:
I misread your post a little bit, but I don't see it reducing search ability by much, having pinkie_pie + character_variant might have some false positives but I don't see it being a very big problem.
when you say fandom name tag, you mean like alternate_name? That would specifically cover things like molestia, pinkamena, futashy etc. Right? I could see that working.

Yes. If they were given a catagory separate to themselves (preferrably with an option to have it not be viewable /snob) that wasn't as beholden to TWYS, it'd be okay by me. You'd still have to have SOME reason for tagging something, but it'd be far more lenient since it also applies to fandom-related topics, like *sigh* the aforementioned Scoota<emotion> tags, or Molestia, or Eeveelutions, or the like. This keeps normal tags, which are used specifically to tag only what is in the image, separate from fandom-created terms and tags tht, while applicable for the fandom, isn't appropriate for an all-(appropriate)audiences situation. Prefix a tag with something like 'fndm:' so "fndm:Pinkamena" and it's now a Fandom tag. Useless tags would still be purged as time goes on (so a tag with only a few images tagged with it that is niche even for the fandom would be tossed, for example), but they'd be able to be a hell of alot more subjective, and we wouldn't have issues like this cropping up where there's one character in the image and two character tags.

123easy said:
Yes. If they were given a catagory separate to themselves (preferrably with an option to have it not be viewable /snob) that wasn't as beholden to TWYS, it'd be okay by me. You'd still have to have SOME reason for tagging something, but it'd be far more lenient since it also applies to fandom-related topics, like *sigh* the aforementioned Scoota<emotion> tags, or Molestia, or Eeveelutions, or the like. This keeps normal tags, which are used specifically to tag only what is in the image, separate from fandom-created terms and tags tht, while applicable for the fandom, isn't appropriate for an all-(appropriate)audiences situation. Prefix a tag with something like 'fndm:' so "fndm:Pinkamena" and it's now a Fandom tag. Useless tags would still be purged as time goes on (so a tag with only a few images tagged with it that is niche even for the fandom would be tossed, for example), but they'd be able to be a hell of alot more subjective, and we wouldn't have issues like this cropping up where there's one character in the image and two character tags.

the only real problem with that is it only really helps the brony fandom and that's BOUND to piss off alot of people, since its like giving in to the bad tags, but letting them all have a prefix to let you know its for them. If it could be a more universal tag or be usable by more than one audience it would be more useful. Not that its a bad idea but really its kindof an excuse to let in bad tagging under a different name.

Basically what we need is one or two doall tags that can be used outside of the fandom, that when supplemented by other pre existing tags, gives the user the search results they want.

Sollux said:
the only real problem with that is it only really helps the brony fandom and that's BOUND to piss off alot of people, since its like giving in to the bad tags, but letting them all have a prefix to let you know its for them. If it could be a more universal tag or be usable by more than one audience it would be more useful. Not that its a bad idea but really its kindof an excuse to let in bad tagging under a different name.

Erm, I'm talking a catagory, not "Brony Fandom", just "Fandom". Same as the catagories "Species", "Artist", "Character", and "General". Tag Types, whatever you want to call them. This would be universal, as any fandom could tag any image with appropriate-to-the-Fandom tags. A picture of a Glaceon for example could have "fndm:Eeveelutions", while a picture of Pinkie Pie in her psychotic state could be tagged with "fndm:Pinkamena". This also allows for the issue that Char spoke about int he Eeveelutions thread as well as here, where as the site gets larger we need to be able to be more selective with our searches, apparently (honestly I don't see how we're having huge problems with that, aside from the huge/big/hyper breast implication chain, but I digress).

123easy said:
Erm, I'm talking a catagory, not "Brony Fandom", just "Fandom". Same as the catagories "Species", "Artist", "Character", and "General". Tag Types, whatever you want to call them. This would be universal, as any fandom could tag any image with appropriate-to-the-Fandom tags. A picture of a Glaceon for example could have "fndm:Eeveelutions", while a picture of Pinkie Pie in her psychotic state could be tagged with "fndm:Pinkamena". This also allows for the issue that Char spoke about int he Eeveelutions thread as well as here, where as the site gets larger we need to be able to be more selective with our searches, apparently (honestly I don't see how we're having huge problems with that, aside from the huge/big/hyper breast implication chain, but I digress).

the main problem I see here is huge abuse of the fndm type tag and having dozens of nearly useless tags pop up like any of the scoot tags or if there are any names for pony ships which god knows the brony fandom has to name everything, not that that's a bad thing usually, but if you want to tag it all, it becomes more nightmare fuel than even fndm:pinkamena could handle

Sollux said:
the main problem I see here is huge abuse of the fndm type tag and having dozens of nearly useless tags pop up like any of the scoot tags or if there are any names for pony ships which god knows the brony fandom has to name everything, not that that's a bad thing usually, but if you want to tag it all, it becomes more nightmare fuel than even fndm:pinkamena could handle

Whch is why the only requirement if that goes through I'm asking for is the ability to hide the tags (like a settings option that is by default off), and then let the fandoms police the fandom tags on their images in general, only having mods step in for major issues.

123easy said:
Whch is why the only requirement if that goes through I'm asking for is the ability to hide the tags (like a settings option that is by default off)...

Like blacklist? or what exactly do you mean? :S

If the coding isn't hard, but that sounds like a huge undertaking to make it work right with normal tags and be used separately.

Butterscotch said:
Like blacklist? or what exactly do you mean? :S

I think he means invisible tags sk fndm:pinkamena won't appear under the listed tags but it'll still exist

Butterscotch said:
Like blacklist? or what exactly do you mean? :S

Yeah, like how the blacklist tag list is naturally hidden, but you can click it to reveal itself, or change a setting to make it so it's visible by default; that'd be the easier and all-around better method compared to making the entire catagory invisible if the setting isn't changed, since it'd still be available if you choose to use it, even if normally you don't.

So at this point the only valid options are to make a character_variant tag to use everywhere and supplement searches, and/or a new type of tag, with the prefix fndm: that can be hidden by normal users and allows fandoms to tag anything that would normally be considered bad tagging ( scootabuse, pinkamena, molestia, or any other name for something).

if anyone else has something productive to add, please do.

Sollux said:
So at this point the only valid options

False alternative - there is another valid option. Keep fandom things to fandom sites like 20pc, and leave e621 free of this.

I already said why I think that alternative_character tag is IMO wrong, and is only sidestepping the problem. Though it's still better to have only one tag that will be useless than countless instances of them.

Making whole system of fandom prefixed tags is just stupid, and I don't think that there is a simple way to make them invisible to others, especially when it comes to tagging.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
False alternative - there is another valid option. Keep fandom things to fandom sites like 20pc, and leave e621 free of this.

I already said why I think that alternative_character tag is IMO wrong, and is only sidestepping the problem. Though it's still better to have only one tag that will be useless than countless instances of them.

Making whole system of fandom prefixed tags is just stupid, and I don't think that there is a simple way to make them invisible to others, especially when it comes to tagging.

this discussions only going to keep coming back if we don't do something to fix it, so we can't really just say keep away all fandom tags and expect everyone to deal with it. Not saying that shouldn't be the way to go, but really there has to be something we can do, especially considering the massive amount of mlp posts nowadays.(seriously over 50k at this point)

character_variant isn't a useless tag by any means, it could be used to blacklist anything different from source material or to supplement searches to find fanmade characters based on actual ones like futashy or others, even outside the brony fandom.

I admit making a whole new set of tags for fandom names is a bit much, but if the coders can do it without much effort and it doesn't screw with the current tagging system it could work, though it would probably be abused.

Sollux said:
this discussions only going to keep coming back if we don't do something to fix it, so we can't really just say keep away all fandom tags and expect everyone to deal with it. Not saying that shouldn't be the way to go, but really there has to be something we can do, especially considering the massive amount of mlp posts nowadays.(seriously over 50k at this point)

There are hundreds of aliased tags like this.
There is aliased princess_molestia, and nobody complained before this thread.

I can't remember any thread screaming: "We want futashy back!!!"

There was a lot tags like eris_(mlp) for crossgender discord, and others for different characters. Once they were removed without alias nobody complained.

My guess is that once this tag is deleted nobody will even remember that it existed. I wouldn't be surprised if its number of instances is result of few bronies with tag script. Once somebody will finally delete this tag bronies won't have motivation to tag it again. Because it's useless tag.

character_variant isn't a useless tag by any means, it could be used to blacklist anything different from source material or to supplement searches to find fanmade characters based on actual ones like futashy or others, even outside the brony fandom.

Any picture has character that is somehow different from source material. Artists have different styles. Artists forget to draw Rainbow Dash's wings. Artists change species, gender, and everything about characters. I really don't think that there is person who would like blacklist/search for any change to source material.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
...
I can't remember any thread screaming: "We want futashy back!!!"
...

Which is a bit funny, because in reality the futashy character is significantly more different from fluttershy, than pinkamena is from pinky pie, or molestia is from celestia etc.
Cartoonlion created a whole new character, in a separate setting, they didn't just slap a dick on a pony.

But then, futashy was never on the show, so the fans couldn't care less.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said: Any picture has character that is somehow different from source material. Artists have different styles. Artists forget to draw Rainbow Dash's wings. Artists change species, gender, and everything about characters. I really don't think that there is person who would like blacklist/search for any change to source material.

I'm not saying any change whatsoever, but if there's a running gag of said character like futashy crosshender discord or the male variants of the mane 6 that one artist does.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
There are hundreds of aliased tags like this.
There is aliased princess_molestia, and nobody complained before this thread.

I can't remember any thread screaming: "We want futashy back!!!"

There was a lot tags like eris_(mlp) for crossgender discord, and others for different characters. Once they were removed without alias nobody complained.

My guess is that once this tag is deleted nobody will even remember that it existed. I wouldn't be surprised if its number of instances is result of few bronies with tag script. Once somebody will finally delete this tag bronies won't have motivation to tag it again. Because it's useless tag.

Any picture has character that is somehow different from source material. Artists have different styles. Artists forget to draw Rainbow Dash's wings. Artists change species, gender, and everything about characters. I really don't think that there is person who would like blacklist/search for any change to source material.

The problem, Gilda, is that we have three admins who are going, "Nope, it stays" and aren't giving any good reasons for *why*, or even rebutting the points given against their arguments. I would by far and away prefer to just nuke the tag, since if they weren't admins and just users their arguments would be shot down as having no substance (be honest here. There have been plenty of threads where people have made just the same arguments and they were shut down because they had no solid argument), but because they are and so far they say no, what do we do? We can't just stand on one side and they on another and just continue this forever.

A partial resolution where the tag is removed from the character pool (win for us in favour of removing it) and where a fandom catagory is created to toss all those incessant fandom meme tags that will eventually crop back up again (win for them because it keeps the tag, semi-win for us because it's in a different catagory, where we don't need to deal with it because fandoms can fight it out on their own, and by default it's a collapsed catagory) when the next new big thing comes out, or the next wave of whatever-fandom fans come to e6.

123easy said:
The problem, Gilda, is that we have three admins who are going, "Nope, it stays" and aren't giving any good reasons for *why*, or even rebutting the points given against their arguments.

To be honest this also pisses me off a little. The only response to my arguments from admins was to call one of them as bawwing.
It's ironic, because in the show RD also has chosen ponies over Gilda T.T

but because they are and so far they say no, what do we do? We can't just stand on one side and they on another and just continue this forever.

As I said before, at this point maybe I would accept to simply leave Pinkamena alone, and forget that this thread ever existed - including their threats to revive other tags. Yes, I consider suggestions to revive Princess Molestia as a threat to force status quo.

A partial resolution where the tag is removed from the character pool (win for us in favour of removing it) and where a fandom catagory is created to toss all those incessant fandom meme tags that will eventually crop back up again (win for them because it keeps the tag, semi-win for us because it's in a different catagory, where we don't need to deal with it because fandoms can fight it out on their own, and by default it's a collapsed catagory) when the next new big thing comes out, or the next wave of whatever-fandom fans come to e6.

I really think that they'd rather accept deleting Pinkamena then this. It's not only still bad (I see no way how to make stupid tags not affect tagging), but it probably requires a lot of effort. There are many more important things that need to be done to site right now before we can think about implementing new features like this.

123easy said:
The problem, Gilda, is that we have three admins who are going, "Nope, it stays" and aren't giving any good reasons for *why*, or even rebutting the points given against their arguments. I would by far and away prefer to just nuke the tag, since if they weren't admins and just users their arguments would be shot down as having no substance (be honest here. There have been plenty of threads where people have made just the same arguments and they were shut down because they had no solid argument), but because they are and so far they say no, what do we do? We can't just stand on one side and they on another and just continue this forever.

A partial resolution where the tag is removed from the character pool (win for us in favour of removing it) and where a fandom catagory is created to toss all those incessant fandom meme tags that will eventually crop back up again (win for them because it keeps the tag, semi-win for us because it's in a different catagory, where we don't need to deal with it because fandoms can fight it out on their own, and by default it's a collapsed catagory) when the next new big thing comes out, or the next wave of whatever-fandom fans come to e6.

as long as it doesn't get in the way and its not too hard to code I don't see a problem with that. Even if it is kindof giving in a bit at least there won't be anymore repetitive discussions on the subject.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I really think that they'd rather accept deleting Pinkamena then this. It's not only still bad (I see no way how to make stupid tags not affect tagging), but it probably requires a lot of effort. There are many more important things that need to be done to site right now before we can think about implementing new features like this.

When they implimented the process of Species, Character, Artist, General tags way back when, they must have coded the catagories in somewhere. Adding another catagory shouldn't be too hard, I'd think? It's basically just another descriptor in a table, no? (In case it isn't obvious, my knowledge of coding isn't very strong :P)

Also, how would stupid tags affect tagging for the rest of us? If it's a stupid fandom tag like Sccotabuse and its variants, it gets chucked into the fandom catagory. If it's just a stupid tag, it gets nuked, just like stupid tags get nuked nowadays. Usually.

123easy said:
Also, how would stupid tags affect tagging for the rest of us? If it's a stupid fandom tag like Sccotabuse and its variants, it gets chucked into the fandom catagory. If it's just a stupid tag, it gets nuked, just like stupid tags get nuked nowadays. Usually.

Have you tried to correct one mistake in tagging on pictures like post #329124? The more tags are on picture, the more difficult is to do tag editing. If you want to implement this just as another category then expect rather big growth in such tags. Doing that gives green light for people from fandom to tag more stupid tags. Edit textbox is going to be bigger, and bigger.

There are, of course, even more things (One that come in my mind is searching for tags with wildcard when you don't remember it exact name. For example I always forget how to spell cunnilingus, and have to make this search. The more tags starting like this, the more difficult is to search. And believe me, some fandom will invent such names.) when adding new category doesn't help at all.

For the first, I ctrl+f the tag I'm trying to edit anyways, because the tags aren't even on a new line like I'd first thought they'd be when I started editting way back long ago (Which reminds me... I should pick up a tagging project. It's been awhile) so it's hard to even read where one tag begins and one tag ends when there's more than a handful of tags. That won't change if this goes through or not.

As for the second... google search? read/use a dictionary? >_>; But more seriously, add additional characters to your tag check, since three is a woefully short number of them to pinpoint anything Just adding one 'n' to make 'cunn*' returns six tags of which hilariously three are incorrect spellings of cunnilingus (I can't see any posts for two of them, though they list a few posts each... did you fix them already? I fixed the third).

Soooo what's going to happen with the tags?

In forum #100196 Rainbow_Dash said:
She is completely different. Her hair is always flat, her demeanor (yes you can tag demeanor as it shows in physical form) is always sad and depressed, which emotions can be tagged when they are displayed. Her behavior is most certainly tagged as it is consistently associated with murdering and mutilating, a HUGE reason the characters need to be separate. This unstable, depressed version is canon.

Oh goodie, so it this official definition? Can I start to massively remove this tag from pictures that doesn't match all points in this definition? Like those I mentioned here?

There will be a lot of brony butthurt after I remove half of instances of this tag and I don't want to get another record so I'm asking first.

Rainbow Dash said:
How is a tag with 1,000 uses, no consistency problems and a clear, concise definition stupid?

AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!
That's a good one. :D

P.S.
If there's no answer in a week then I consider this definition official, open post #331110 in separate window to inspire me, and begin the big genocide of Pinkamena. ^^

The wiki has a pretty good definition here. Without clashing on the issue it simply comes down to being useful for users to come to our site and have a reliable way to search for the psychotic version of pinkie pie. There is no harm in having it, but there is harm in removing it

EDFDarkAngel1 said:
Okay then... been going over all the comments, and talked with the admins.

Pinkamena refers to the canon character where she goes crazy in Friendship is Magic and, during that time, exhibits a different personality, the scenery/setting tends to reflect a more chaotic/psychotic theme, and the character traits, are all marks that the art is visibly different than the characteristics of Pinky Pie.

In that, an alias would not serve the best interests of the site. While art may reflect the fanfic version of Pinkamena, this was only considering the canon material.

This also goes in regards for Molestia, being that she is entirely a work of fan fiction, and the precedent doesn't apply.

Dave pretty much hit it on the head here and Char too before him. It serves a purpose, so we will use it. We aren't just ignoring everyone's suggestions, but we haven't seen any good reason to remove it whereas there is a good reason to keep it. It is usefull

The reason we tag is to identify significant features in the image that people care about. Even if a distinction between two forms of a character isn't what we normally do, people obviously care about it in this instance, so the tags should reflect that.

We shape our tagging practices to serve how people want to use the tagging system. Blind adherence to strict rules helps no one.

Okay, so I'm going to remove this tag from pictures that doesn't match chaotic/psychotic theme. Starting with posts like post #315440, and post #330887. Then I will start removing from sad, but not psychotic pics. Then finally less then half pictures will be still tagged with this tag, but it will finally be consistent.

Let's say that for now, I completely forget about the fact that whole idea that character is different because she is sad is stupid. For now I accept this. Now I'm just cleaning this mess up according to official definition.

The definition in the wiki actually singles out her straight hair as her defining feature, and notes that the depression, sadism, and insanity are just how she's usually depicted. Maybe you outght to revert all those changes you just made, Gilda. That's kind of vandalish.

Wyvrn said:
The definition in the wiki actually singles out her straight hair as her defining feature, and notes that the depression, sadism, and insanity are just how she's usually depicted. Maybe you outght to revert all those changes you just made, Gilda.

That's why I asked Rainbow Dash about definition before I made this changes. Wiki's are not always reliable and often outdated. You might want to read how Rainbow Dash proves that this tag describes a separate character.

If you believe that pool #1109 contains pinkamena, then Rainbow Dash definition is wrong. Argue with Rainbow Dash, not with me.

Now excuse me, I have tags to nuke. *sings happy song about genocide and goes back to work*

You cited an exasperated, hyperbolic definition Rainbow Dash gave in the other thread. A definition that said her hair is always straight, she's always sad and depressed, and she's always murdering and mutilating.

That's obviously not the official definition, and when you asked if it was, Rainbow Dash pointed you to the wiki and cited Dave. Nobody ever said it was okay to remove the pinkamena tag from images where she's not sad, depressed, psychotic, and murdering someone all at the same time.

Rainbow_Dash said:
The wiki has a pretty good definition here. Without clashing on the issue it simply comes down to being useful for users to come to our site and have a reliable way to search for the psychotic version of pinkie pie. There is no harm in having it, but there is harm in removing it

Dave pretty much hit it on the head here and Char too before him. It serves a purpose, so we will use it. We aren't just ignoring everyone's suggestions, but we haven't seen any good reason to remove it whereas there is a good reason to keep it. It is usefull

I rebutted Dave's post, which was mainly a repeat of his previous post that didn't address any of the concerns raised in this thread.

123easy said:
...There is no canon character named Pinkamena that is a separate character from Pinkamena Diane Pie, who typically shortens her name to Pinkie Pie. There is a fan fiction created character based on the one-time psychotic break that occured, which had slight art changes as denoted previous in multiple posts both my own and those of others. I have also linked images here, on this site, that show how there is no visible difference other than the straight hair, which has its own tag itself (And thus makes this fan-created characterization searchable through Pinkie_Pie_(mlp) straight_hair).

"exhibits a different personality" is strictly against TWYS, and as such an irrelevant factor. Many characters are depicted out of character in various scenes- I highly doubt we'd ever see Twilight Sparkle fucking a futanari Fluttershy, for example, or Krystal from Starfox actually being as slutty as artists have depicted her. In this case her psychotic break is canon, BUT it being a different character is strictly fan-fiction, demonstratably so by simply watching the episode and noting that she still exhibits all the same traits as pinkie pie in a more subdued fashion, and is also paranoid and deluusional until it's revealed that her friends were planning a surprise birthday party for her, at which point she immediately returns to normal physically and mentally.

Scenery and background being different have nothing to do with the character, as well; Just because someone has a bloody and black background behind them does not mean that the character itself is different; Otherwise, when someone 'sees stars' because they've been hit in the head, and there's a spinning background with stars, asterisks, hashmarks, and other symbols to represent the dazed and confused feeling, you're saying that that is actually a different character just because the background is different.

The only changed character traits are those involved with the psychotic break, which is a mental condition which we do not tag and do not consider for tagging as per TWYS, and is just a restatement of the "different personality" point which is refuted above. Further in regards to that, once the psychotic episode was over (within the same episode), she returned to her normal manic self (her hair even fluffs up on its own at that point) from her depressive psychotic state; as such, the 'canon character' is only Pinkie Pie, not some other character that inhabits her body for a period- her darker side is just usually suppressed; You can see similar situations occur with the Discorded ponies, as well as when Twilight goes loopy because of her schedule going haywire (didn't have a letter on the topic of hat she learned that week about friendship to Celestia) and the stress getting to her. However, because the fandom didn't leap on that characterization and create a fan fiction version of Twilight that was that popular, we don't have a separate character tag for that (that state also only lasted an episode too; the episode name was Lesson Zero).

If you intend to have your phrase 'character traits' apply only to physical traits (as mental traits have already been refuted as being irrelevant due to TWYS), once again, straight_hair is the only real 'standard' as many images don't even use the darkened palette here or offsite; Even Google's search that Char brought up has a very large variety for how she's depicted, even including her being happy/manic, but with the straight hair instead of her poofed hair, or sad/depresserd with the poofed hair (as she was originally in the episode leading up to her psychotic break as well).

Please, if you're going to defend the tag, at least use an argument that doesn't refute the most intrinsic tagging rule of the site, and actually address the points being brought up refuting even those points.

This was never responded to either. Now, to address your post more directly rather than referring to Dave's post:

Without clashing on the issue it simply comes down to being useful for users to come to our site and have a reliable way to search for the psychotic version of pinkie pie.

"pinkie_pie psychotic" works just fine for images where she is depicted as a psycho. "pinkie_pie depressed" works just fine for when she is depicted as depressed- these are visual cues of behaviour being tagged, not the direct behavioural aspects implied.

The tag pinkie_pie_(mlp) will be added automatically in conjunction with this tag because you can't have Pinkamena without Pinkie Pie, however, you can have Pinkie Pie without Pinkamena.

The wiki also states this, which intrinsically refutes its own existance as a character tag. You don't identify a split personality as an actual separate person from the original, but as a facet of that person- much as you're trying to portray her and as the wikis statement seems to imply, at first.

However, it would only be true if she actually displayed any traits that are recognizable as belonging to Disassociative Identity Disorder whereupon "Pinkamena" would be an actual separate identity. However, she does not, and that is why it refutes its own existance, because she remains the same character throughout, merely developing paranoia and suffering through a mild psychotic period. While canon that she does suffer from bouts of depression and psychosis, that isn't a separate character in and of itself.

For any unaware of the definition of psychosis, it is defined as, "A severe mental disorder, with or without organic damage, characterized by derangement of personality and loss of contact with reality and causing deterioration of normal social functioning". Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde actually is a case of DID where Hyde is a separate identity within Dr. Jekyll, as well as a marked physical transformation that is identifiable as a separate character at first glance without previous knowledge of the character- Hulk and Bruce Banner would be a more modern take on that situation.

EDIT:

Wyvrn said:
You cited an exasperated, hyperbolic definition Rainbow Dash gave in the other thread. A definition that said her hair is always straight, she's always sad and depressed, and she's always murdering and mutilating.

That's obviously not the official definition, and when you asked if it was, Rainbow Dash pointed you to the wiki and cited Dave. Nobody ever said it was okay to remove the pinkamena tag from images where she's not sad, depressed, psychotic, and murdering someone all at the same time.

Wiki states:
A pony from the My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic series. Pinkamena is primarily pink with straight, pink hair and light blue eyes, often slightly parted or off center. The polar opposite of her normal self, Pinkie Pie, she is mostly found depicted in depressing or sadistic manners, as implied by her personality. Most notable aspects include her straightened hair, insane grin and muscle spasms.

The tag pinkie_pie_(mlp) will be added automatically in conjunction with this tag because you can't have Pinkamena without Pinkie Pie, however, you can have Pinkie Pie without Pinkamena.

RD said that the wiki definition is fine, so thus anything that doesn't fall under the wiki definition is fair game, is what Gilda is saying/using, without touching on the actual validity of the tag's existance itself. I'm not touching that aspect of this any further than that, just trying to explain what I'm seeing.

Wyvrn said:
That's obviously not the official definition,

So, admin claims are obviously not official definition? And people are saying that I'm the one who is against admin ruling.

Wiki is a mess, and may (but not must there is, for example "The polar opposite of her normal self, Pinkie Pie" part which wasn't present in any picture I retagged) be interpreted as pinkie_pie straight_hair, but this is against everything what supporters of this tag says.This is not "clear, concise definition". In this interpretation of wiki this is obviously a stupid tag.
Anyway, that's why I'm starting with removing pictures where Pinkie is not her "polar opposite", or at least it's not visible on picture.

For example on post #184999 there is nothing that suggest that this is polar opposite of Pinkie Pie.

After I remove these type of pictures, I'll think about pictures where she is only very very sad.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
This is not "clear, concise definition". In this interpretation of wiki this is obviously a stupid tag.

To my knowledge, there is no clear, concise definition. I've read this thread like 4 times, and I've heard a dozen ways you can interpret Pinkamena. For fucks sake, why is this tag even necessary?

ANY definition of Pinkamena could be searched with the combinations Pinkie_pie gore, Pinkie_pie straight_hair, Pinkie_pie psychotic, or Pinkie_pie straight_hair gore psychotic.

There is literally no reason for this tag to exist.

What's the justification for removing the pinkamina tag from every ambiguous picture instead of adding it? Wiggle room in the definition exists so we can apply our discretion sensibly. Seems like you're abusing the wiggle room to push your agenda.

SirAntagonist said:
To my knowledge, there is no clear, concise definition. I've read this thread like 4 times, and I've heard a dozen ways you can interpret Pinkamena. For fucks sake, why is this tag even necessary?

ANY definition of Pinkamena could be searched with the combinations Pinkie_pie gore, Pinkie_pie straight_hair, Pinkie_pie psychotic, or Pinkie_pie straight_hair gore psychotic.

There is literally no reason for this tag to exist.

I was about to respond that straight hair on head are the common theme, but then I retagged these two:
post #192209
post #192182

They don't even show face. Separate character my ass.

What's the justification for removing the pinkamina tag from every ambiguous picture instead of adding it? Wiggle room in the definition exists so we can apply our discretion sensibly. Seems like you're abusing the wiggle room to push your agenda.

As I said I'm leaving more ambiguous cases now. I'm not removing everything as it goes.

Wyvrn said:
What's the justification for removing the pinkamina tag from every ambiguous picture instead of adding it? Wiggle room in the definition exists so we can apply our discretion sensibly. Seems like you're abusing the wiggle room to push your agenda.

Gilda is fixing the pictures according to the e621 definition.

And if I personally were to apply my discretion sensibly, I'd be deleting the tag from hundreds of images.
but i don't wanna get b& hammer'd

When I say "apply out discretion sensibly", I mean we should get over the fact the pinkamena tag exists, and then apply it according to whether each picture we come across is what people are looking for when they search pinkamena. That's obviously not what is going on in Gilda's tag-removal crusade.

Wyvrn said:
When I say "apply out discretion sensibly", I mean we should get over the fact the pinkamena tag exists, and then apply it according to whether each picture we come across is what people are looking for when they search pinkamena. That's obviously not what is going on in Gilda's tag-removal crusade.

No, tags don't work that way. We're not getting over people who add gay tag to male solo -cum pics. I deleted hundreds of gay tags from male solo pics, is this also tag-removal crusade? Are you for removing all the rules, or just when it's about pony tags? What about people who when searching for pinkamena wants to see only psychotic one? There are a lot of people who interpret this tag like that - are they not important to you?

Yes, tags do work that way. We apply our discretion within the bounds of the tag's definition. Discretion does not allow adding gay to male solo -cum pics because the gay tag's definition requires multiple participants.

You're right on one count though, we definitely do need a clear and concise definition of pinkamina. I actually think defining it as pinkie_pie with straight_hair is the best way to go.

Wyvrn said:
Yes, tags do work that way. We apply our discretion within the bounds of the tag's definition. Discretion does not allow adding gay to male solo -cum pics because the gay tag's definition requires multiple participants.

You're right on one count though, we definitely do need a clear and concise definition of pinkamina. I actually think defining it as pinkie_pie with straight_hair is the best way to go.

Then you can, like, ask admins to change current wiki definition that states that Pinkamena_(mlp) is polar opposite of Pinkie Pie. I'm currently removing this tag from picture where it can't be even discussed that this is polar opposite of Pinkie Pie. This is the same thing as removing gay from male solo pictures even though someone thinks that definition should be expanded.

There are hundreds more tags when there can be discussed whether it's polar opposite of PP, or is she just temporarily sad without being crazy. I'm leaving that tags for now. Really I've said this few times before.

Actually, you know what. I'm convinced. I'd be in favour of aliasing pinkamena_(mlp) to straight_hair.

But the thing is, people are still going to search for pinkamena without also adding the pinkie_pie_(mlp) tag, and they're going to add the pinkamena tag to images they upload without adding the pinkie_pie_(mlp) tag. These would obviously have problematic results if pinkamena were aliased to just pinkie_pie_(mlp).

Pinkamena is a popular character, one that's distinct from Pinkie Pie in many people's minds, so there's no way we could ever change everyone's searching and tagging practices. For that reason, I'd only support this if it were possible to alias pinkamena to two tags simultaneously, straight_hair and pinkie_pie_(mlp), in a way that would work both for uploading and for searching.

There, I changed it to say she's often the polar opposite of her normal self. Now stop deleting the tag.

That's another reason it's stupid to hold up the wiki page as the ultimate authoritative definition: anyone can change it. Rainbow Dash didn't even say it was the official definition. You asked what the official definition was, and RD said "the wiki has a pretty good definition", not a perfect one.

Let the argument play out before making potentially destructive changes. Someone might have to add all those all back you know.

Wyvrn said:
There, I changed it to say she's often the polar opposite of her normal self. Now stop deleting the tag.

That's another reason it's stupid to hold up the wiki page as the ultimate authoritative definition: anyone can change it. Rainbow Dash didn't even say it was the official definition. You asked what the official definition was, and RD said "the wiki has a pretty good definition", not a perfect one.

Let the argument play out before making potentially destructive changes. Someone might have to add all those all back you know.

Changing wiki definitions without discussion is against the rules, I know, I got a stern talking to for doing it once.

Halite said:
Changing wiki definitions without discussion is against the rules, I know, I got a stern talking to for doing it once.

My mistake, change reverted. My point still stands though, when RD pointed out the wiki page, it was never implied that it was the be-all-end-all definition.

Wyvrn said:

Let the argument play out before making potentially destructive changes. Someone might have to add all those all back you know.

And I added straight_hair to almost every Pinkamena_(mlp) tag I removed. Searching for pinkie_pie_(mlp) straight_hair -pinkamena_(mlp) gets these pictures for you.

But the thing is, people are still going to search for pinkamena without also adding the pinkie_pie_(mlp) tag (...)

Then make tagging project for adding straight hair tag correctly. Lack of Pinkie Pie straight_hair equivalent is not bigger loss than any other alternative character tag that was nuked. You don't see cries "how can I find molestia now?!" on forums, do you? It is also not bigger problem than not tagging feral/anthro(fied)/human(ized) tags on mlp pictures, and apparently very few people cares about this enough to add tags. So instead of tagging pinkamena tag to every Pinkie Pie with straight hair make use of very underused straight_hair tag - it's much more beneficial to the site.

Anyway, I'm done with first wave of nukes. The obvious one are gone, next goes the ones where I had even a second of doubt. But I'll wait few days with that. I, like SirAntagonist, would like to delete much more instances then this. Talking about over half gone, from the beginning was not an exaggeration.

Wyvrn said:
When I say "apply out discretion sensibly", I mean we should get over the fact the pinkamena tag exists, and then apply it according to whether each picture we come across is what people are looking for when they search pinkamena. That's obviously not what is going on in Gilda's tag-removal crusade.

Fine. Which of the dozens of definitions should we go by? Or is it up to each user's discretion to determine what the tag actually means, and then go off that? If so, that's a horrible way of tagging. That plan throws consistency out the window.

YOU may think that Pinkamena only implies straight hair, but the majority seem to think it's a personality trait.

SirAntagonist said:
Fine. Which of the dozens of definitions should we go by? Or is it up to each user's discretion to determine what the tag actually means, and then go off that? If so, that's a horrible way of tagging. That plan throws consistency out the window.

YOU may think that Pinkamena only implies straight hair, but the majority seem to think it's a personality trait.

In my opinion it is the physical traits such as straight hair, and that personality alone does not warrant the tag. So the wiki should be defined further to state that although most of the time she is insane, sometimes she is just the sad rock farm pony and the tag would still apply

If our tags were more flexible in allowing for aliasing more than one tag at a time, then by all means it would be set up differently, but we just don't have the ability to do that.

The simple, bottom line of why this tag is staying, is because people search for it, and we have to cater to that and not try to make work around searches that they won't have the attention span to pursue and still won't always be tagged in the future.

Rainbow_Dash said:
In my opinion it is the physical traits such as straight hair, and that personality alone does not warrant the tag. So the wiki should be defined further to state that although most of the time she is insane, sometimes she is just the sad rock farm pony and the tag would still apply

Either she's crazy and insane character, or she is just Pinkie Pie. Part of Pinkie Pie character was that she was sad on rock farm - she wasn't called Pinkamena by anyone. She is also many times pictured as sad in fim.

My point is, EDF said in his decision that, let me quote "Pinkamena refers to the canon character where she goes crazy in Friendship is Magic and, during that time, exhibits a different personality, the scenery/setting tends to reflect a more chaotic/psychotic theme, and the character traits, are all marks that the art is visibly different than the characteristics of Pinky Pie." This is her defining trait. It's like having horn for unicorns. You can't say that sometimes we allow unicorns to not have horns, because people searching for unicorn want to see Rarity.

So in few days, I'm removing not psycho Pinkie's to match EDF definition.

Rainbow Dash said:
The simple, bottom line of why this tag is staying, is because people search for it,[citation needed]

If people really search for psychotic version of Pinkie Pie, then why no one clean this tag from pictures with young/absolutely not crazy character? The only people who benefit from this tag are those who claim that this is not separate character but pinkie_pie straight_hair equivalent. And you, and EDF, state that this tag is not only about hair.

Number of instances is not a proof of anything. Any person with tag script can easily tag so many pictures in few hours - see thread where someone claimed to do that with legendary_pokemon tag.

His definition is correct for pinkamena, however people searching for her are going to want to see her how they see her on other sites and from that part of the show when she was still known as pinkamena. He is saying that the reason we tag this character who's only physical difference is straight hair, is because the subject matter that it is often involved with is so drastically different. Otherwise it probably wouldn't be that big of a deal. This tag really only affects those trying to search for it, so removing it is not in everyone's best interests

Please do not strip away those tags. Edf's definition is not an exact and literal definition of how we are going to tag this. When you remove those tags, you are making it harder for people to find what they want, whereas leaving them on affects you in no way. We are trying to define this as simply as possible, and that stripping the tags is not helping.

Rainbow_Dash said:
Please do not strip away those tags. Edf's definition is not an exact and literal definition of how we are going to tag this.

Wait, wait, wait...
So you all, after long and constructive debate in admin team, decided that pinkamena tag is worth keeping but, somehow, failed to decide how this tag is supposed to be used? Is this a some kind of a joke?

You make up one definition to decide that this tag stay, and only after this is decided you change this definition because now you want to tag it differently? Is this a new standard for tagging?

You can't claim that tag stays because it has clear and concise definition A, and then make definition B when actually tagging it.

*reads the entire thread* ......*jumps out window and runs away*

I have had enough of the drama in this thread. This is now locked. Any further discussion can be on a separate thread.