What is the meaning of that tag exactly? wouldn't it be better to alias that to invalid_tag, since it clearly states an opinion.

Or would this be used for characters that are actually saying "do want"? wouldn't the "speech" tag be better suited for that?

I guess it's supposed to be an equal and opposite tag to do_not_want.

I don't like that tag, it will get stuck to every image someone finds attractive. I vote on nuking. do_not_want is a valid though because I see it a lot and it has a clear purpose

I support nuking both. They're extremely subjective tags and I think e6 tends to want to avoid subjective tags.

Blaziken said:
I support nuking both. They're extremely subjective tags and I think e6 tends to want to avoid subjective tags.

You are correct sir, haz a cookie

do_not_want is analogous in purpose (in some cases) as what_has_science_done, anyway.

rest of it's just "i'm too lazy to blacklist" for things like excessive gore, probably.

what about post #51363 and the additional varying want tags there

no

For what little it's worth, I agree with Blaziken, Celestia, and Ippiki. I can't see how do_want and do_not_want belong in the world of tagging.

I don't like either of them, but I think we should alias the do_not_want tag to something else like "what has science done" just because it's used so much

I don't like either do_want or do_not_want, and I vote that they be aliased to invalid_tag.

Also, I would not support aliasing do_not_want to whsd, because I interpret whsd to mean something entirely different from do_not_want. While I would rather that we clean up whsd, its abuse should suggest that we nuke it, as well, not that we make matters worse by aliasing unrelated tags to it.

Well, while we're at it, what about:

• where_is_your_god_now
• what
• wtf
• what the christ
• no

In my estimation, every one of these is kind of a taggy way of saying "I don't like this image." They're all really subjective and seem more like a meme-ish way of trying to be funny.

and these tags:
- amazing = 100% subjective
- tagme = unnecessary, because we're smart enough to see when a pic needs more tags

Munkelzahn said:
and these tags:
- amazing = 100% subjective
- tagme = unnecessary, because we're smart enough to see when a pic needs more tags

tagme is added when there are no other tags on the image, so we need to leave it alone.

Munkelzahn said:
and these tags:
- amazing = 100% subjective

But easily agreeable if tagged properly. "Amazing" can refer to a picture which puts incredible detail and extreme thought into its work.

"Amazing" may also be metal bagpipes.

Generally, if an image is tagged as "amazing" and it remains, that's a consensus.

Those tags are supposed to show characters displaying a "do want" or "do not want" attitude.
But as usual, people can't do things properly, and use them to express their opinion.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Kald said:
Those tags are supposed to show characters displaying a "do want" or "do not want" attitude.
But as usual, people can't do things properly, and use them to express their opinion.

This is why we can't have nice things.

That's not the direction the site's Wiki gives.

Which is not to say that the Wiki always has to be right, but it is what taggers are supposed to reference for clarification on usage.

From what I've seen, amazing and amazing background aren't abused because if the majority of people don't agree, they remove the tag.

Kald said:
Those tags are supposed to show characters displaying a "do want" or "do not want" attitude.
But as usual, people can't do things properly, and use them to express their opinion.

This is why we can't have nice things.

I see do_not_want a lot and most times it's either quoted from the text or the character has a certain expression associated with the tag. Do_want I don't see as much and Id like it nuked as it is very inconsistent, but I can also see that if used properly, it can apply to a very specific emotion or action.

Some tags are a little subjective such as nightmare fuel but we still need that tag in place.

If we can make a clear definition for it's use then it's a matter of tagging correctly and not a poor tag. Same goes for any tag subjective or not.

DobiesHot said:
Well, while we're at it, what about:
(list)

Munkelzahn said:
and these tags:
(list)

I'll break my opinion up into sections, because I want to pontificate and otherwise need an excuse to play with the new section tag in DText.

That was fun.

Let's all cool our nukes for a second, that's usually a last resort.

Where is your god now- horrific events that imply a god would not have let it happen. Needs some cleanup but is still defined

What-random. All things aliased to it make sense and "no" fits well enough with them to stay.

Amazing-just means someone shows a very high degree of skill to render something in such great detail. This has never been a big problem tag and if it becomes one we can reevaluate it.

Do want and do not want usually refer to a characters expression. It needs a lot of cleanup because people are using it for there opinions, which makes it more subjective than necessary.

Subjective tags were previously brought up in forum #25256,forum #29444, and probably even before that

There was some discussion about leaving the more popular ones, but nothing concrete

Subjective tags have been talked about for longer than I've been a member here. Probably ever since the booru was first launched. Or at least ever since it was decided that "tag what you see" was the official policy.

In the end, the most important factor seems to be whether the tags are useful. A lot of tags have been kept for a long time because they're useful, even if they are subjective. A lot of tags have been nuked because they were useless. Many more have been aliased together.

For my part, I just like to chime in with my opinion. Maybe people agree, maybe not, but at least I'm trying to contribute.