Seriously folks, I've gone over this multiple times, and it's still not registering. I am going to type this all in cruise control for cool in hopes it might sink in this time but probably won't.

IF AN IMAGE LOOKS UNDERAGED, TAG IT AS CUB, LOLI, SHOTA, OR YOUNG. THIS INCLUDES CHARACTERS THAT LOOK UNDERAGE BUT ARE NOT, LIKE SAY HALF THE GATOMON IMAGES TO USE AN EXAMPLE. IF IT MIGHT BE UNDERAGE BUT IT IS VERY HARD FOR A NORMAL PERSON TO TELL, SUCH AS A SMALL TEEN CHARACTER, THEN USE THE 'YOUNG' TAG.

Obviously, cub stuff generates its own special set of freakouts and problems, however the fact some people don't like it isn't the issue here. There are people who use this site who live in countries where this material is illegal to view - Australia, parts of Europe, etc, or in a legal grey area, such as Canada. No other type of content we allow except possibly bestiality has this particular issue, however, those images seem to get properly tagged.

In the interest of not having to either ban content from the site, or ban entire countries from accessing the site, these images need to be tagged so that people from these countries can blacklist them should they be concerned about accessing such prohibited content. We would like these users to be able to feel they can browse this site safely, and simultaenously, don't want to censor our uploads any more than we already do.

This is entirely possible to do, but we need your help. PLEASE tag these images appropriately, and if you see any that are not, please add the appropriate tags. Our users from these countries will surely appreciate the effort to keep their computer clean. Thank you.

And people say you are a bad guy :D

I just looked over a few pages of Gatomon posts, and IMO I don't consider them to be 'cub'.

I think it is a very subjective term, which is the cause of it not being attached as much as mellis wants.

Mellis is, however, an admin and as such, his word is law around these parts.

Is there a way to mass-edit tags, rather than adding them into images one-by-one?

DragonRanger said:
Is there a way to mass-edit tags, rather than adding them into images one-by-one?

If you'll write a script that will detect cub porn, I'll write another part, which will tag it.

Kitsu~ said:
I just looked over a few pages of Gatomon posts, and IMO I don't consider them to be 'cub'.

I'd say about half of them could be interpreted as cub by a person who isn't familiar with Digimon. It also doesn't help that Digimon has a heavy loli/shota fanbase via the Digidestined, which gets reflected in a lot of the furry content as well.

Same is true for a lot of Pokemon work.

...
...
...

In my opinion, almost any Gatomon drawing without fully-developed breasts added to the character, could be interpreted as cub. She is a character that is very small in stature, and is flat chested. Drawn "canon-ly," she's pretty much a loli in all ways except age.

EDIT: Actually now that I think about it... in canon, the Digimon were all about 5 years younger than the Digidestined, which would make Gatomon underaged. Season 1 Gatomon would be around age 8 and Season 2 Gatomon would be around age 11, I guess?

Yes, someone said before "if it looks like a ... then tag it as a ..."

Basically tags are used to describe image, not backstory

If you know backstory and it's notable enough for people to care, tag with both. It's acceptable to use a not_X tag too for things that <i>look</i> X but are not according to the Word of God.

I'm still going to replace /cub/ and /preteen/ tags on standalones with /young/ or nothing at all if a) she has actual boobs, b) isn't dressed in a rancid fly-infested fucking nappy or a schoolgirl outfit in anything other than an ironic way, and c) I notice a) or b) and can be arsed to fix it. It's a small contribution to de-creepy-fucking the place, but the giant throbbing wisdom of crowds is made of small individual contributions.

Oh and if you post size diference, I noticed a cob pic that said size diference where a teacher was screwing a cub over a desk and 'size' diference was what was listed.

Meh all I upload is cub so I always tag my crap as such.

[from Australia] I'm quite shore it's illegal here down under. There have being numerous cases in the media where people have being prosecuted and jail for cartoon pornography. Also the aust. government has flagged some content on this site to be blocked... they might just go for the whole thing as they are blocking a hell of allot of web 2.0 sites.

A little note: pornography is actually illegal to sell down here despite it being widely available.

additional: TAG YOU CUB IMAGES I DON'T WANT TO SEE THEM [tn]BAAAWWW!!![/tn]

[from Balkan] Nothing is illegal here 8)

But will tag stuff if spotted.

Actually, disregard that. I don't mind cub porn, but I don't find it erotic. Will also tag cub images if I come across them.
Random question: This doesn't extend to non-explicit images with cubs in them, does it?

Images should always have the correct tags regardless of their rating.

Riversyde said:
Random question: This doesn't extend to non-explicit images with cubs in them, does it?

It's still a cub Riverside :) You wouldn't stop marking something male or female just cause it wasn't adult..

That seems to cause conflict though.

Cause the common response to people who want to avoid pedophiliac content is to blacklist "cub" But if they don't want to blacklist images that aren't portraying the sexual exploit of a child?

I was under the impression that (I cannot believe I'm actually getting ready to use this analogy -_-;) the tag "cub" was equivalent to "gay" in the way that "child" is equivalent to "male".

That cub was a title for the specific act of sexualizing children. And thus it shouldn't apply to children in non-sexual drawings.

EDIT: There really seems to be an insufficiency and ambiguity in the tags here.

Is it possible to blacklist a tag on one rating only?

I don't think it's possible, and even if it was, I don't think it's a good solution. After all... Images with an incorrect rating are more common than images that with major tags missing.

...

As an example of what I was talking about...

http://e621.net/post/show/40329/

It seems almost hilarious to label this image needs the tag "cub", simply because it has a child in it. It is in no way pedophiliac. If cub is going to be a term that applies to EVERY image that has a child in it, then there really needs to be a tag like "Pedophilia" for sexual images that people would want to blacklist.

If we're going to keep dancing around the subject and try to be politically correct by calling furry pedophilia "cub," then there HAS to be a separate tag for children in non pedophiliac situations.

You can use rating:e/q/s as a tag in the blacklist settings.

To be sure, one can put "cub -rating:s" in one line.

There are low chances that stuff rated safe contains cub porn, as opposite to "questionable" which is the default rating that lot of lazy people leave upon upload.

Marbles said:If we're going to keep dancing around the subject and try to be politically correct by calling furry pedophilia "cub," then there HAS to be a separate tag for children in non pedophiliac situations.

The simple solution is to add the "ageplay" tag. This encompasses sexual acts that include one seemingly underage character and one mature character. "cub" can be a child masturbating or two children having sex, after all. An alternate tag could be "underage".

Why not use 'cub' and 'cub_porn'?

Seems simple enough to figure out which is which.

'cub' just denotes it's got an underaged/child furry character. This has been in use for a long time, this isn't something we invented here. The other tags denote if it's explicit or not, as does the rating.

Loli and Shota, on the other hand, do tend to imply sexual images, as they are terms created to describe characters belonging to particular sexual fetishes.

Tagging underaged or underaged-looking furry characters as cub is not only proper tagging, which improves the site, but allows easier filtering when dealing with the aforementioned issues. But that's all it means folks - furry child.

I've tried to be plain with this as possible - describing proper use of the tags, their meaning as far as this site is concerned, the reasons to be using them, the general situation surrounding them, etc. I don't get why this topic refuses to die, or why this has to be so complicated. Can you imagine if we had this level of argument over every damn tag on the site? This isn't even a particularly weird or confusing one, like the 'what' tag.

mellis said: This isn't even a particularly weird or confusing one, like the 'what' tag.

Well the easiest way to explain the what tag is: something that makes you go "wat?"

It just comes down to a "Tag your fucking shit people!" thing because bad tagging is a crime punishable by hearing my drunk grandfather yodel.

EinTheCorgi said:
It just comes down to a "Tag your fucking shit people!" thing because bad tagging is a crime punishable by hearing my drunk grandfather yodel.

<em> xD Oh lawdy, that must be terrible!</em>

<em>EDIT: Put him on YouTube! xD</em>

EinTheCorgi said:
It just comes down to a "Tag your fucking shit people!" thing because bad tagging is a crime punishable by hearing my drunk grandfather yodel.

Actually bad tagging is punishable by banning :)

WolfieWolfie1992 said:
<em> xD Oh lawdy, that must be terrible!</em>

<em>EDIT: Put him on YouTube! xD</em>

I would have if he hadn't just passed. :(

Wait a minute, I have no problem with this but, can't the people in those countries be responsible enough that ,if they don't want to get into trouble their legal system, why don't they just not click on the thumbnail that links to the image? unless they are hitting the "next" button every time; I don't see a big problem with it.

EinTheCorgi said:
I would have if he hadn't just passed. :(

<em>I'm sorry to hear that...my condolences to your family.</em>

skeeter said:
Wait a minute, I have no problem with this but, can't the people in those countries be responsible enough that ,if they don't want to get into trouble their legal system, why don't they just not click on the thumbnail that links to the image? unless they are hitting the "next" button every time; I don't see a big problem with it.

I wasn't aware there was a quality exemption in anyone's legal system. What's legally defined as child porn will be legally defined as child porn whether it's at a 150x150 res or not, and many places don't have an exemption for not having intended to view it. As such, the thumbnails coming up on the main post listing right now could cause problems for some people, since some assholes don't bother tagging anything.

Edit: I suppose I should go do something about that.

acct0283476 said:
<b>Edit:</b> I suppose I should go do something about that.

Acct0283476: Already ahead of you :)

skeeter said:
Wait a minute, I have no problem with this but, can't the people in those countries be responsible enough that ,if they don't want to get into trouble their legal system, why don't they just not click on the thumbnail that links to the image? unless they are hitting the "next" button every time; I don't see a big problem with it.

This is a part of it, but should it ever come up, it helps IMMENSELY to have an established pattern of the site taking all resonable steps to help users blacklist the content. It both helps cover our ass, as well as gives huge weight to the defense of any users who, god forbid, get in trouble because of the content.

Since a large part of the western legal model relies not only on the actual act, but also the intent, if we can show that all reasonable steps were taken to protect the users from those countries, and show that they have a reasonable expectation to be able to avoid the content because of those steps, then it weighs greatly in their favour should they argue that such exposure was indeed accidental or a fluke, since, ideally, it should be.

An image by Adam Wan which previously had bickering about whether it should be tagged cub or not has cropped up again in a more finished version... Since debate went nowhere fast last time, could somebody hand down a word of god on post #77804?

[EDIT]
Thanks for the input, but I meant I'm waiting for an admin/mod to give a decree on it. Like I said, debate went nowhere before.

He did something similar with otters in post #53068 but that didn't strike me nearly as cub-ish as this did. The dog character is pretty hot but the otter is so child-like it was immediately off-putting. I can see what he's trying to do with different body builds of species, but I do not like cub stuff and I find it hard to look past in that picture. If we're tagging things by how they look rather than artist's intent, then I say tag it as cub.

mellis said:
"In the interest of **not having to either ban content from the site, or ban entire countries from accessing the site** these images need to be tagged so that people from these countries can blacklist them should they be concerned about accessing such prohibited content. We would like these users to be able to feel they can browse this site safely, and simultaenously, don't want to censor our uploads any more than we already do."

We should comply with this request, lest e621 turn into the next Fchan. Personally I don't want that to happen, especially since WildCritters, the only other site I know of with such a diverse and large collection of such images, is now dead and gone.

However I can understand the issue of aesthetic, some characters are simply just "chibi" and some characters are ambiguous to a point one cannot ascertain an age by simply looking at it. Might as well just tag it as such to be on the safe side and not cause this wonderful drama free site to go the way of other formerly fun images boards.

Given recent events, prohibiting cub art really should be reconsidered. Ross is obsessed with e621 (you should see him compulsively editing his wiki page to make his actions look heroic), and any number of other people with an axe to grind might exploit the issue to attack the site.

It's probably better to stand up for free speech by continuing to operate, than to attempt to be martyred by hosting material that a hosting center or ISP will readily assume is illegal, just to be safe.

It's not like the host or the ISP is obligated to protect free speech. They're only obligated to protect their best interests (which probably are not e621's best interests).

WaffleSteel! said:
Given recent events, prohibiting cub art really should be reconsidered. Ross is obsessed with e621 (you should see him compulsively editing his wiki page to make his actions look heroic), and any number of other people with an axe to grind might exploit the issue to attack the site.

It's being discussed.

Especially with iroo being an asshat right now we should at least cool it on the cub images for a while... At least till this crap blows over.

You can always pull a Danbooru and just hide the images, although I personally think only the non-safe ones should be hidden (and slam anyone who doesn't tag them appropriately).

Or require a privileged account. Which requires money. Meaning people would essentially be paying money for cub art. Heheheh.

WaffleSteel! said:
It's probably better to stand up for free speech by continuing to operate [by censorship], than to [refuse to censor legal materials]

Sorry to put words in your mouth, but honestly that's what it boils down to. You're basically suggesting the site compromise ideals (of, admittedly, admins/mods who are not here anymore), thus giving fuel to the opponents of those ideals due to the common misconception that "they gave up/quit/acceded because they know it's wrong"...

Considering that FA has nearly the exact same vulnerabilities on this, and they've decided to keep cub porn after (not despite) advice from multiple lawyers, I'd say that banning it here would be somewhat absurd. Admittedly, this site also has human/proto-human drawn porn of the same type, which FA did ban after said lawyer advice. Personally, I've got similar opinions to Arcturus' on that, but they're not running the site anymore...
*Shrug*

acct0283476 said:
Sorry to put words in your mouth, but honestly that's what it boils down to. You're basically suggesting the site compromise ideals (of, admittedly, admins/mods who are not here anymore), thus giving fuel to the opponents of those ideals due to the common misconception that "they gave up/quit/acceded because they know it's wrong"...

Considering that FA has nearly the exact same vulnerabilities on this, and they've decided to keep cub porn after (not despite) advice from multiple lawyers, I'd say that banning it here would be somewhat absurd. Admittedly, this site also has human/proto-human drawn porn of the same type, which FA did ban after said lawyer advice. Personally, I've got similar opinions to Arcturus' on that, but they're not running the site anymore...
*Shrug*

Believe me I know why it would suck to have to do it, and I don't agree with having to censor any form of art. Until this issue is actually brought to a civil or criminal court to force a clarification of the law, it's just going to be a dangerous grey area, and no site without the resources to exhaust in a courtroom is going to achieve a change to that.

This issue is one for the courts. Protesting it independently like this might feel liberating but it also doesn't change the problem and it just makes it easy to keep getting the site shut down.

Maybe some nature of compromise... Hide certain tags unless you are logged in. This could actually double in making things more 'safe for work' too (That is, rather then just include 'cub' include most sexual words like penetration, pussy, penis, anal etc.) There's still the issue that some people won't tag images, but....

and, this may be a stupid question, but what about finding different hosting in an alternate physical location that isn't as likely to find such things illegal? I'm not sure where such a place would be, but...

SnowWolf said: I'm not sure where such a place would be, but...

Netherlands. Isn't this where YS/Sofurry have their European mirrors? They too host plenty of cub and some human child porn(drawn). Hentai-Foundry, a site hosted in the US, never had legal problems with virtual human child porn, IIRC. Another factor in the matter is the amount of people who want to harm a site, which grows proportionally with its popularity.

I seriously expected e621 to ban human drawn child porn in order to become less vulnerable to this kind of malevolent prosecution. After all, apart from some monster trainer rule#34s, there isn't much that would be lost. I doubt e621 would be a good spearhead to fight for freedom of speech, and I'm saying that as someone who would be strongly affected by this. I'm not an expert in this area, but wouldn't §1466A(Obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children), which also applies to computer data, cause some problems as well? It makes an exception for works that have a certain artistic value, but since most of these images are primarily of a pornographic nature, I'm afraid that this would be another law that could spell the end of this site, and a lot of image boards/galleries.

SnowWolf said:
Maybe some nature of compromise... Hide certain tags unless you are logged in.

This is probably the best idea.

I don't really give a damn about cub images unless the moderation starts affecting some of the "borderline" artists that I'm a fan of, like Inuki, who's characters all seem to dance all up and down on the line of barely legal. But, I still think this is the right way to do it.

It doesn't completely block people out like Danborro, but at the same time, allows the flexibility to generally prevent harrassment.

I get the sneaking suspicion that the people dropping the "get rid of teh cubbeh awrtz!" comments are doing so because they have a personal hate for it and they want to see it gotten rid of the way Fchan did.

Banning cubs on e621 will just increase witch hunting and "I'm morally superior to you! (while I fap to images of furries being cut up into bits or shot through the head)" mentalities. I'd prefer this place stay 'laid back.'

Sure, not everybody here shares the same likes or beliefs, but atleast you get to have them and freely discuss or joke one way or the other and at the end of it all people would just go back to their 'corner' of the site.

And I don't see why any of it matters anyway, animal people or Digi-whatever trainers, they're both non-existent beings, not a living breathing person. And the argument that "viewing x can lead to the person wanting to try x in real life" can be applied to most anything.

Like if a guy sees an image of two furries who are both past 18 and one is violently raping the other, maybe that'll make him want to go rape somebody. And rape is pretty illegal, rite?

Silly_Lil_Foxcub said:
I get the sneaking suspicion that the people dropping the "get rid of teh cubbeh awrtz!" comments are doing so because they have a personal hate for it and they want to see it gotten rid of the way Fchan did.

Banning cubs on e621 will just increase witch hunting and "I'm morally superior to you! (while I fap to images of furries being cut up into bits or shot through the head)" mentalities. I'd prefer this place stay 'laid back.'

Sure, not everybody here shares the same likes or beliefs, but atleast you get to have them and freely discuss or joke one way or the other and at the end of it all people would just go back to their 'corner' of the site.

How about this, tell me or another mod that they are saying these things... So we can properly convince them of the power blacklists... by force if neccessary.

Silly_Lil_Foxcub said:
they want to see it gotten rid of the way Fchan did.

Cub art wasn't removed on Fchan because of a shift in the user base, or even in the moderators. The administration did it protect themselves. It happened directly after new legislation on internet pornography and obscenity passed (thank you George W. Bush), which led to the closure of several furry, and non-furry, pornographic sites. I know Husky closed her yiff site too (and I can't remember the name of it now to save my life), right after it went live. Her site, and several of the others that closed had nothing to do with underage stuff, but still got hit by the new laws.

The few sites left that do hold cub art often do so because they maintain the idea that because it's furry, it couldn't possibly be likened to a real child, and therefore isn't subject to that legislation. I know of at least two men who have been sentenced to jail time for importing lolicon for their personal use.

Fact is, cub and loli art is a potential risk for all parties involved. And doubly so for any site owners who host it. e6's administration, new and old, have always been a fair and free minded folk when it comes to content. You can bet that if it ever were to removed it would be to protect themselves from the possibility of legal action. Apparently, you can commit a crime agaisnt fictional characters here in the US.

As much as I despise artistic censorship, no matter the content involved, I'd much rather see Varka out of jail and e621 up and running.

Hellacious said:
As much as I despise artistic censorship, no matter the content involved, I'd much rather see Varka out of jail and e621 up and running.

iawtc

Hellacious said:
As much as I despise artistic censorship, no matter the content involved, I'd much rather see Varka out of jail and e621 up and running.

Is this true? How'd Varka get imprisoned?

WolfieWolfie1992 said:
Is this true? How'd Varka get imprisoned?

I'm posting from my prison cell, of course.

Please re-read the last paragraph of Hellacious's post again.

Varka said:
I'm posting from my prison cell, of course.

Please re-read the last paragraph of Hellacious's post again.

LOL

NVM, I see what he meant now...

WolfieWolfie1992 said:
Is this true? How'd Varka get imprisoned?

Rumor has it he started equipping warheads on his arsenal of dragon dildos.

Char said:
Rumor has it he started equipping warheads on his arsenal of dragon dildos.

Cockrockets.

this goes from serious to humorous quite fast. thanks varka for making my day.

Short of getting super drastic (as mods having to review each image before it can be seen on the main page), I suggest we start with an addition of another check off box which must be checked before allowing a post to be made "I hereby confirm that this image is not loli, cub or young; or if it is, it has been correctly tagged as such.".

If people still can't correctly tag their uploads, then uploading gets monitored/filtered before being posted.

God, please don't go the way of damn FA, all thats doing is giving into what the new neo-conservative bullshit taking over the world wants.
I'd rather not have to repost all the cub artwork again to a new site that will just cave to shitty witch hunts and paranoia over and over again.

There has GOT to be a place for people to express themselves through art, cub or not. When we take that away we force people to take more drastic measure. There has to be a level of artistic freedom that does not shackle art with the tight closed minded morality of the real world.

People have been drawing weird shit for ages, has it hurt anyone yet? I really doubt it. Has a picture every been raped or traumatized? no.
But real children are raped and beaten everyday, BUT OH NO, FORGET ABOUT THAT, LETS WORRY ABOUT TEH FANTASY CREATURE CUBBY PRONZ.

*also, that idea about having to be logged in to see certain images is a really good one*

baracudaboy said:
God, please don't go the way of damn FA, all thats doing is giving into what the new neo-conservative bullshit taking over the world wants.
I'd rather not have to repost all the cub artwork again to a new site that will just cave to shitty witch hunts and paranoia over and over again.

There has GOT to be a place for people to express themselves through art, cub or not. When we take that away we force people to take more drastic measure. There has to be a level of artistic freedom that does not shackle art with the tight closed minded morality of the real world.

People have been drawing weird shit for ages, has it hurt anyone yet? I really doubt it. Has a picture every been raped or traumatized? no.
But real children are raped and beaten everyday, BUT OH NO, FORGET ABOUT THAT, LETS WORRY ABOUT TEH FANTASY CREATURE CUBBY PRONZ.

*also, that idea about having to be logged in to see certain images is a really good one*

Actually, a simple way: Instead of blacklisting tags from people not logged on, Make all non-safe images hidden by default, to be changed in user settings, along with a reminder to create a blacklist at the time they change their settings to allow viewing of adult images. (e.g. reminding them to blacklist things such as cub or scat if they are squicked or otherwise wouldn't want to view said images)

Lyokira said:
Actually, a simple way: Instead of blacklisting tags from people not logged on, Make all non-safe images hidden by default, to be changed in user settings, along with a reminder to create a blacklist at the time they change their settings to allow viewing of adult images. (e.g. reminding them to blacklist things such as cub or scat if they are squicked or otherwise wouldn't want to view said images)

I support this idea.

Hear, hear Baracuda :)

Lyokira said:
Actually, a simple way: Instead of blacklisting tags from people not logged on, Make all non-safe images hidden by default, to be changed in user settings, along with a reminder to create a blacklist at the time they change their settings to allow viewing of adult images. (e.g. reminding them to blacklist things such as cub or scat if they are squicked or otherwise wouldn't want to view said images)

Also, this is a really good idea. Maybe we could even include a list of some of the 'big' tags that people may want to blacklist... ranging from 'male' to 'lesbian' to 'guro' to 'cub'. (also maybe a quick blacklist 101 so they know they can do things like male solo etc :) )

I second Baracuda's emotion.

Also.

Lyokira said:
Actually, a simple way: Instead of blacklisting tags from people not logged on, Make all non-safe images hidden by default, to be changed in user settings, along with a reminder to create a blacklist at the time they change their settings to allow viewing of adult images. (e.g. reminding them to blacklist things such as cub or scat if they are squicked or otherwise wouldn't want to view said images)

Agreed.

SnowWolf said:
Also, this is a really good idea. Maybe we could even include a list of some of the 'big' tags that people may want to blacklist... ranging from 'male' to 'lesbian' to 'guro' to 'cub'. (also maybe a quick blacklist 101 so they know they can do things like male solo etc :) )

This. It'd make things a lot easier. We could even list simple explainations in case anybody was unsure as to what they meant (even if some are obvious).

Cub: Loli/Shota of anthropomorphic characters.
Diaper: Characters wearing diapers, in sexual or non-sexual situations.
Egg-Laying: Character laying eggs. Almost always rated Explicit.
Gay: Male/Male sex.
Guro: Mutilation/gory.
Lesbian: Female/Female sex
Loli: Underage female.
Peeing: Self-explainatory.
Rape: Self-explainatory.
Scat: Excrements; poop; act of pooping.
Shota: Underage male.
Watersports: Peeing during sexual activity.

One that I personally would prefer to add(I greatly wish I'd known this one before signing up)...

Nezumi: An artist whose art is not for those with sensitive eyes or minds.

Anybody feel free to add to this.

Lyokira said:
Actually, a simple way: Instead of blacklisting tags from people not logged on, Make all non-safe images hidden by default, to be changed in user settings, along with a reminder to create a blacklist at the time they change their settings to allow viewing of adult images. (e.g. reminding them to blacklist things such as cub or scat if they are squicked or otherwise wouldn't want to view said images)

thats good, if all adult images were blacklisted to non members, well, even better then mine!

Burninghart said:
Anybody feel free to add to this.

Intersex,
Herm,
Cuntboy,

if you want to avoid seeing a particular gender, it's also wise to actually tag the things related to that gender because for some stupid reason people constantly leave out "female" or "male" in their tagging.

this is why I haven't even bothered with blacklisting female and just went straight for "breasts" and "vagina." But this applies to almost anything. If there's a related tag to something you don't want to see, it's generally prudent to blacklist that as well.

Burninghart said:
I second Baracuda's emotion.

Also.

Agreed.

This. It'd make things a lot easier. We could even list simple explainations in case anybody was unsure as to what they meant (even if some are obvious).

Cub: Loli/Shota of anthropomorphic characters.
Diaper: Characters wearing diapers, in sexual or non-sexual situations.
Egg-Laying: Character laying eggs. Almost always rated Explicit.
Gay: Male/Male sex.
Guro: Mutilation/gory.
Lesbian: Female/Female sex
Loli: Underage female.
Peeing: Self-explainatory.
Rape: Self-explainatory.
Scat: Excrements; poop; act of pooping.
Shota: Underage male.
Watersports: Peeing during sexual activity.

One that I personally would prefer to add(I greatly wish I'd known this one before signing up)...

Nezumi: An artist whose art is not for those with sensitive eyes or minds.

Anybody feel free to add to this.

I'm not entirely convinced that 'Egg-Laying' is 'Almost always rated Explicit.'. Yoshi's is the king of non-explicit egg-laying, and rather famous for it too.

I'd stick to the 'big tags' that cover the 'big stuff'.

Here's my list, comprised of several posts:

--Age--
Cub - Features a anthropomorphic (furry) characters who are youthful, and who may or may not be in a sexual situation.
Loli - Features a female character who is percieved to be underage. This character may be human, or may be a furry, and may or may not be in a sexual situation.
Shota: Features a male character who is percieved to be underage. This character may be human, or may be a furry, and may or may not be in a sexual situation.

While the above terms should cover all underage characters and images, it is also recomended that you add the following two tags if you do not wish to view that sort of material:

Underage
Young

--Sexual preferences--
Gay - Features two, or more male characters, engaged in a sexual act with one another.
Lesbian - Features two, or more female characters, engaged in a sexual act with one another.

Please note that neither of these tags involve sexual acts with characters who are not male or female, but are a mixture of two. Additionally, a solo male engaging in masturbation with a dildo is not gay either. (For that, blacklist: male solo anal_penetration)

You may also wish to consider the following:
Intersex - Featuring at least one character who is not strictly male or female... this includes the following tags:
Herm - Featuring a character that is a hermaphrodite--featuring both male and female parts.
Cuntboy - Featuring a character with a male's build, but a vagina instead of a penis.
dickgirl - Featuring a character with a female's body but a penis instead of a vagina.

--Gross!--
Peeing - Features the act of urination in some fashion. This is closely related to
Watersports - Features urine in a sexual manner.
Scat - Features the presence of fecal mater (poop/shit) in some fasion, sexual or otherwise.
Guro - Contains a scene that involves some grotesque imagry... blood, gore, disembowment, dismemberment, guts, mutilation...
Rape - Features a scene of nonsoncentual sex. This may be 'playful' rape (bedroom roleplaying) or 'real' rape. In any event, one character is not willing to engage in the sexual act that is occuring and is obviously distressed over this event.
Torture: Features a character in pain. This is generally covered by 'guro' but not always.

--Weight--
Obese - Features a character that is overweight. See also: Morbidly Obese
Chubby - is a very light form of obesity.
Fat - Features a character who may be any of the above. A good 'blanket' tag to blacklist in attition to the others.

I'm probably still missing some, but I don't think egglaying/oviposition is 'extreme'... and diapers should be fine as long as a dirty diaper is tagged with scat/pee etc.

Hm.. do we have a tag for 'old people'?

Oh yeah.. and...

Nezumi - While his works are greatly enjoyed by some, most find Nezumi's work to be distasteful... >>click here<< to look and determind for yourself.

SnowWolf said:
--Sexual preferences--
Gay - Features two, or more male characters, engaged in a sexual act with one another.
Lesbian - Features two, or more female characters, engaged in a sexual act with one another.

Doesn't have to be a sexual act. You could have a gay couple holding hands or kissing.

Hat said:
Doesn't have to be a sexual act. You could have a gay couple holding hands or kissing.

Fair enough. But when's a hug between friends and when's a kiss between brothers and..

I actually experienced a lot of frustration while writing this because of some of the gray areas involved. a solo male isn't gay, but what if he has cum leaking out of his gaping ass, or is pleading for 'you' to fill him up, etc. Not to mention the murky area around herms/intersex and sexual acts, and the fat/chubby/obese thing and... yeah.

SnowWolf said:
Fair enough. But when's a hug between friends and when's a kiss between brothers and..

I actually experienced a lot of frustration while writing this because of some of the gray areas involved. a solo male isn't gay, but what if he has cum leaking out of his gaping ass, or is pleading for 'you' to fill him up, etc. Not to mention the murky area around herms/intersex and sexual acts, and the fat/chubby/obese thing and... yeah.

Suggestion! Make a specialized tag which filters only if multiple conditions are invoked, e.g. gay + explicit/questionable, or flash + rickroll.

Lyokira said:
Suggestion! Make a specialized tag which filters only if multiple conditions are invoked, e.g. gay + explicit/questionable, or flash + rickroll.

It already exists, just put multiple tags on one line in the blacklist.

but what if he has cum leaking out of his gaping ass

Fair enough...

or is pleading for 'you' to fill him up

Asking for a pegging, possibly?

Lyokira said:
Suggestion! Make a specialized tag which filters only if multiple conditions are invoked, e.g. gay + explicit/questionable, or flash + rickroll.

Yup, that would be covered in the blacklist 101 ;)

'solo - used to denote that there is a single charcter in the image. Frequently used in searches and blacklists to single out or exlude a specific type of character. Common uses: Solo female, solo feline, solo male vulpine'

Asking for a pegging, possibly?

Possibly. There were only a few gay+solo images anyway and I went in and 'fixed' some that were 'lol i'm gay and this is mah fursona and he's gay too, like me' and such.

there were still a good 8 or 10 tat stymied me though.

SnowWolf said:
Yup, that would be covered in the blacklist 101 ;)

Doh! Then again I'm one of those who doesn't plan to have a blacklist so I don't know much about it at all..

Well, this all sounds well and good but are we actually going to implement it?

think there are probably more pressingissues going on, but if nothing else the ideas are up out and vocalized.

In any regard, if I can do anything to help out in any regard, let me know -- I'd like to help however I can, and I'm one of those dirty pervs who'd like to keep cub art on here :P