Implicating shibari → kinbaku
Link to implication

Reason:

Those terms are nearly synonyms, shibari is act of tying, while kinbaku, actual name of the art of bondage or BDSM play which involves tying up the bottom with rope using visually intricate patterns.

This is bad because shibari has been aliased to something else

But is the implication still good if I move around the alias?

Rainbow_Dash said:
But is the implication still good if I move around the alias?

may be alias them both to rope_bondage, as it's what shibari is aliased to? I dunno.

Unneeded implication that just adds a bloat tag as rope_bondage already covers both the act of tying and the actual finished result. Kinbaku should be aliased to rope_bondage as well, if it's a common enough term, but ten posts that were all uploaded by Swiftkill here says it's not utilized. Fixed the tags.

Swiftkill, I know english isn't your first language, but learn the rules, the tagging system, and what words actually mean before you continue to make suggestions, please.

123easy said:
Unneeded implication that just adds a bloat tag as rope_bondage already covers both the act of tying and the actual finished result. Kinbaku should be aliased to rope_bondage as well, if it's a common enough term, but ten posts that were all uploaded by Swiftkill here says it's not utilized. Fixed the tags.

^ First, that's what I offered in the post above. I didn't saw alias to rope_bondage initially.
Second, don't blame me, when I was uploading, I was adding shibari AND kinbaku tags.. kinbaku went gone, shibari got replaced by recently added alias. I not sure who and why kinbaku was deleted, but I stopped adding it later.

I am okay with aliasing both to rope_bondage