I'm thinking of taking the stance that Danbooru has with human-with-animal-ears gender-specific tags like catboy and catgirl and sorting them by the type of ears they have, which is not gender-specific. Tags should not be gender-specific, unless they are gender tags. Both catgirls and catboys have cat ears, so they should both be aliased to cat_ears, because having cat_ears and gender as well as catboy/girl is redundant. Gender-specific tags like catboy and catgirl should not have been used in the first place, really. We don't use the "ess" suffix to denote a female, like in dragoness or lioness. We use female.

So... y/n?

Yeah sure why not.

Riversyde said:
I'm thinking of taking the stance that Danbooru has with human-with-animal-ears gender-specific tags like catboy and catgirl and sorting them by the type of ears they have, which is not gender-specific. Tags should not be gender-specific, unless they are gender tags. Both catgirls and catboys have cat ears, so they should both be aliased to cat_ears, because having cat_ears and gender as well as catboy/girl is redundant. Gender-specific tags like catboy and catgirl should not have been used in the first place, really. We don't use the "ess" suffix to denote a female, like in dragoness or lioness. We use female.

So... y/n?

Half agree: Technically the problem with seperating cat_ear from catboy and catgirl is that there may be more than one creature in the scene, thus making it impossible to tell which gender belongs to which accessory. But logically, only very few species type is differenciated to gender regardless, so cat_ear critters shouldn't have preferential status.

Riversyde said:
I'm thinking of taking the stance that Danbooru has with human-with-animal-ears gender-specific tags like catboy and catgirl and sorting them by the type of ears they have, which is not gender-specific. Tags should not be gender-specific, unless they are gender tags. Both catgirls and catboys have cat ears, so they should both be aliased to cat_ears, because having cat_ears and gender as well as catboy/girl is redundant. Gender-specific tags like catboy and catgirl should not have been used in the first place, really. We don't use the "ess" suffix to denote a female, like in dragoness or lioness. We use female.

So... y/n?

The problem is the same as for tags like "vixen" or "doe" ; they imply both a specie and a gender, and the system doesn't allow "forked" aliasing (1 tag aliased to 2 or more tags).

I'd say yes, but only because gender is tagged by most users, otherwise you would lose some meaning.

Heavily, heavily mixed feelings. And this is mostly because I kinda thing we SHOULD have female_fox male_fox tags.

Danbooru has the advantage that, for the most part, you're dealing with humans. If you search 'female'.... 95% of your results are, probably, going to be what you want.. At least, in terms of humans vs. non humans.

But, we have a huge array of species here... and searching female+fox will turn up girl foxes, boy foxes fucking girl foxes, boy foxes fucking girl rabbits, two gay foxes fucking while a girl bear watches in horror, two girl squirrels fucking with a pervy guy fox watching... a bear and a bird screwing with a fox plushie on the bed... yeah.

we have a lot of arguments why female_fox male_fox other_fox could be helpful...

but THAT would be a horrendous undertaking in retagging that is utterly horrifying to think about.

... I think..... hmm... I think catgirl and catboy should both imply cat_ears... but leave cat_boy and cat_girl alone.

but then, on the other paw: it also starts a slippery slop. foxboy and foxgirl? antelopegirl and antelope boy?

Plus, we have the animal_ears tag (currently, cat_ears is the only one that implies animal-ears)...

so.. I guess... I dunno. *pokes it with a stick*

More clarity vs consistency, I guess.

I lean towards clarity, but most people seem more inclined towards consistency/simplicity.

SnowWolf said:
Danbooru has the advantage that, for the most part, you're dealing with humans. If you search 'female'.... 95% of your results are, probably, going to be what you want.. At least, in terms of humans vs. non humans.

I suppose they do have an advantage... here we have idiots who tag animal_ears on anthro/feral animals -_-... and Danbooru doesn't utilize the female tag.

But, we have a huge array of species here... and searching female+fox will turn up girl foxes, boy foxes fucking girl foxes, boy foxes fucking girl rabbits, two gay foxes fucking while a girl bear watches in horror, two girl squirrels fucking with a pervy guy fox watching... a bear and a bird screwing with a fox plushie on the bed... yeah.

True, but that's the story for pretty much any tag combination. At least the scope isn't as wide with animal_ears.

... I think..... hmm... I think catgirl and catboy should both imply cat_ears... but leave cat_boy and cat_girl alone. but then, on the other paw: it also starts a slippery slop. foxboy and foxgirl? antelopegirl and antelope boy?

Exactly, more tags than necessary to define a subject.

So the general consensus here is pro-*_ears, so unless there are further objections, I'm gonna go ahead with my idea.

[/quote]

You've reached "general consensus" in just 10 hours? I say wait on it a bit, someone may have an objection.

As for my own opinion, I'm indifferent, so aye.

Valence said:
You've reached "general consensus" in just 10 hours? I say wait on it a bit, someone may have an objection.

By general consensus, I meant who had already responded. I was gonna wait for responses until tomorrow, anyway. So anyone who wants to object has about 24 hours to speak up.

Ugh.. you people are gonna fucking drive me absolutely BONKERS with these tags rules.

Stop. Absolutely stop and think..

what's a vixen? a female fox.

if someone types in vixen. they should get the results of female and fox..

how do we do that? with an /implication/
vixen implies female and fox.

and since vixen is not an alias for either female or fox. (they are not identical terms) we use implications because that makes sense.

We do not get rid of the words people search because they don't like them, we imply or alias them because then THEY CAN SEARCH AND NOT BE DUMB SHITS.

Tagging is for everyone, not just the elitist forum crowd. Some people are gonna look up "cat girl and catboy" let them. don't hurt my feelings none. (also you can imply the ears stance onto them just as well, only do alias instances on the ones that are not gender specific. or you will break things.. as with your lioness debackle)

Just don't make it harder on the users.

Riversyde:
I suppose they do have an advantage... here we have idiots who tag animal_ears on anthro/feral animals -_-... and Danbooru doesn't utilize the female tag.

well, in that regard we have people who tag feral on anthros too... c_c

/tangent
well, the wiki page for the feral article is decently written, so that's not the problem...

Although, right now ther feral page DOES list 'animal ears' as being a related tag.. and anthro... Hmm.. I'll rewrite this, I think.

On more important notes: Why the hell does non-anthro exist as a tag? It says "it is unnecessary to add the term "non-anthro" if you've already used one of these tags: "Feral" "Human" "animal_ears"..."

that means non-anthro or feral is redundant. (and the examples on the 'non anthro' page are... ...utterly nonapplicable. seriously: origami ceiling cat, a TEXT image and smome monster or something, wtf)

animal ears, at least, is described properly. *grumble*

/tangent

I didn't know danbooru didn't use the female tag. I go to gelbooru, when I go to a non e621 website. (or ponibooru, but yeah)

True, but that's the story for pretty much any tag combination. At least the scope isn't as wide with animal_ears

Very true.

So the general consensus here is pro-*_ears, so unless there are further objections, I'm gonna go ahead with my idea.

I was thikning about it, and yeah, count me pro-*-ears too. If for no other reason so that herms, cunt boys and the whole "intersex" and "ambiguous gender" range get coverage without weird tags (Lemur_cuntboy! sugar_glider_herm)

all that said, Aurali has some good points too. I know this one has come up before though.. I dunno.

SnowWolf said:
well, in that regard we have people who tag feral on anthros too... c_c

/tangent
well, the wiki page for the feral article is decently written, so that's not the problem...

Although, right now ther feral page DOES list 'animal ears' as being a related tag.. and anthro... Hmm.. I'll rewrite this, I think.

On more important notes: Why the hell does non-anthro exist as a tag? It says "it is unnecessary to add the term "non-anthro" if you've already used one of these tags: "Feral" "Human" "animal_ears"..."

that means non-anthro or feral is redundant. (and the examples on the 'non anthro' page are... ...utterly nonapplicable. seriously: origami ceiling cat, a TEXT image and smome monster or something, wtf)

I use both non_anthro and feral, but only because I don't think we've decided as a site which one to use and which one to discard (unless we have and nobody ever told me). I'm in favor of aliasing one to the other though.

Aurali said:
Stop. Absolutely stop and think..

what's a vixen? a female fox.

if someone types in vixen. they should get the results of female and fox..

Not everyone uses vixen to define a female fox.
Those users would tag a female fox with female and fox, not vixen.
Searching female and fox instead of vixen gives more relevant results.
And yes, users should get the results of female and fox, not vixen, when searching vixen. But that isn't possible.

We do not get rid of the words people search because they don't like them, we imply or alias them because then THEY CAN SEARCH AND NOT BE DUMB SHITS.

Tagging is for everyone, not just the elitist forum crowd. Some people are gonna look up "cat girl and catboy" let them. don't hurt my feelings none.

If we're going to have catgirl and catboy as usable tags, why don't we involve all the other species to be tagged like that? Lemurgirl? Armadillocuntboy? Gryphon_snake_hybrid_herm? We need to be consistent with how we enforce tags.

Just don't make it harder on the users.

This isn't to make it harder on the users. This is to get rid of redundant tags.

tony311 said:
I use both non_anthro and feral, but only because I don't think we've decided as a site which one to use and which one to discard (unless we have and nobody ever told me). I'm in favor of aliasing one to the other though.

well, feral has about 8000, non-anthro has 500.

but, now I'm off topic, so I'll just start a new thread on the matter...

Riversyde said:
Not everyone uses vixen to define a female fox.
Those users would tag a female fox with female and fox, not vixen.
Searching female and fox instead of vixen gives more relevant results.
And yes, users should get the results of female and fox, not vixen, when searching vixen. But that isn't possible.

If we're going to have catgirl and catboy as usable tags, why don't we involve all the other species to be tagged like that? Lemurgirl? Armadillocuntboy? Gryphon_snake_hybrid_herm? We need to be consistent with how we enforce tags.
This isn't to make it harder on the users. This is to get rid of redundant tags.

first quote: Imply both female and fox to it
Second quote: never ever delete a tag. alias or imply it. and if users star adding those tags. then alias and imply those to.
third quote: this ain't an image gallery. the redundancy is what makes it work. you strip all the unneeded tags instead of linking them and your gonna have a very. very broken system riversyde.

Aurali said:

third quote: this ain't an image gallery. the redundancy is what makes it work. you strip all the unneeded tags instead of linking them and your gonna have a very. very broken system riversyde.

The system is broken already. There are posts tagged with catgirl that aren't tagged with cat_ears, and posts tagged with cat_ears and female that aren't tagged with catgirl...

Hey, wait a minute... I just had a revelation. What if... we implicate the *boy/girl to *_ears? Now that I think about it, it's a much better alternative to aliasing.

Ooo. I like that. :D

so:

catboy implicates cat_ears
cat_ears implicates animal_ears?

SnowWolf said:
Ooo. I like that. :D

so:

catboy implicates cat_ears
cat_ears implicates animal_ears?

It will, yes. Catboy implies male, as well.

Riversyde said:
It will, yes. Catboy implies male, as well.

Perfect :3

Lyokira said:
Half agree: Technically the problem with seperating cat_ear from catboy and catgirl is that there may be more than one creature in the scene

This is a problem with Danbooru-like flat ontologies, not the tags themselves.

I really dislike gender-specific tags (unless the tag is *for* the gender), cat_boy, cat_girl, cat_herm, cat_cuntboy, cat_intersex, etc, do you really want those?

SnowWolf said:
Heavily, heavily mixed feelings. And this is mostly because I kinda thing we SHOULD have female_fox male_fox tags.

Danbooru has the advantage that, for the most part, you're dealing with humans. If you search 'female'.... 95% of your results are, probably, going to be what you want.. At least, in terms of humans vs. non humans.

But, we have a huge array of species here... and searching female+fox will turn up girl foxes, boy foxes fucking girl foxes, boy foxes fucking girl rabbits, two gay foxes fucking while a girl bear watches in horror, two girl squirrels fucking with a pervy guy fox watching... a bear and a bird screwing with a fox plushie on the bed... yeah.

we have a lot of arguments why female_fox male_fox other_fox could be helpful...

but THAT would be a horrendous undertaking in retagging that is utterly horrifying to think about.

... I think..... hmm... I think catgirl and catboy should both imply cat_ears... but leave cat_boy and cat_girl alone.

but then, on the other paw: it also starts a slippery slop. foxboy and foxgirl? antelopegirl and antelope boy?

Plus, we have the animal_ears tag (currently, cat_ears is the only one that implies animal-ears)...

so.. I guess... I dunno. *pokes it with a stick*

More clarity vs consistency, I guess.

I lean towards clarity, but most people seem more inclined towards consistency/simplicity.

The problem with hybridizing tags is that it quickly grows out of control, you mentioned a "fox plusie", should we also hybridize that? fox_plushie, but it wouldn't stop there, what if it resembles a male fox? male_fox_plushie? we couldn't discriminate this either, so female_fox_plushie (or perhaps vixen_plushie), herm_fox_plushie, why not add fur color into the mix too orange_female_fox_plushie?

It just multiplies uncontrollably into a huge mess.

The proper course of action would be to have tag sets, where you can specify that different tag attachments are related "( female fox plushie ) ( male fox ) sex", this is an ontology structure issue, not a tagging definition one.

I agree, generally speaking. it's messy, and huge and complicated. very slippery slope.

Kitsu~ said:
The proper course of action would be to have tag sets, where you can specify that different tag attachments are related "( female fox plushie ) ( male fox ) sex", this is an ontology structure issue, not a tagging definition one.

I wish this was true, so very much.

Aurali said:

first quote: Imply both female and fox to [vixen]

So post #129629 would get tagged vixen by implication? I don't see any vixens there.

er, no, try again.

you're taking it out of context. aurali is saying that when joefur goes to the search and types in vixen, that the search should show the results for 'female fox'. This way joefur can search for 'vixen' if he wants to, and bobhairy can search female fox and both get the same results.

No where in this thread has the idea of 'well, clearly, this post is tagged both female and fox, so OBVIOUSLY, there must be a vixen involved somewhere' come up

Snowy said:
So post #129629 would get tagged vixen by implication? I don't see any vixens there.

Don't be a dick.

My only real request is for there to be:
(Male/Female)_Human
(Male/Female)_Anthro
(Male/Female)_Feral

It would make Anthro_Bestiality searches and searches for human-with-anthro images a lot easier to sort through, and with minimal tags.

Bumping because I want to hear opinions on my previous post.

Percy101 said:
My only real request is for there to be:
(Male/Female)_Human
(Male/Female)_Anthro
(Male/Female)_Feral

It would make Anthro_Bestiality searches and searches for human-with-anthro images a lot easier to sort through, and with minimal tags.

It would just get messy and complicated, like the animal people tags already are, which are only there because we can't make forked aliases.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ussCHoQttyQ

+1 to OP, though "fox animal_ears human male" might be how I'd do it.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/LittleBitBeastly for the obligatory TVTropes ref. I kinda like "mostly_human" for the same idea though.

Anomynous said:
+1 to OP, though "fox animal_ears human male" might be how I'd do it.

To find a foxboy? They're not strictly foxes or strictly human, so you can't tag them with it.

I kinda like "mostly_human" for the same idea though.

Ehhhhhh... *_ears is the better option here. Like I said before, messy tags.

Riversyde said:
To find a foxboy? They're not strictly foxes or strictly human, so you can't tag them with it.

Yeah, for a single character. "human" is probably a redundant tag above, but "fox" is fine.

It's fine because you can filter out in searches: "-tag", so if people don't want animal_ears people they can search for "fox -animal_ears". Conversely, drop the minus sign to search for just LittleBitFoxys.

Combinations of tags describing for a single character are fine too, and we do it all the time for hybrid critters. Which isn't to say that it doesn't mess up royally for multiple characters, but we'll cope.

Having a single tag for a tightly defined concept that can be used for inclusion or exclusion is a good idea. Let's do that.

(but in the end, let the group mind do the work, with a little guidance :))

Anomynous said:
It's fine because you can filter out in searches: "-tag", so if people don't want animal_ears people they can search for "fox -animal_ears". Conversely, drop the minus sign to search for just LittleBitFoxys.

That's why we have the fox_ears tag? Fox-people are not foxes.

(Maybe I am getting a little too worked up over this...)