Pokémorph is currently implicated to anthro, but the correct tag for it to be implicated to would be anthrofied.

If this change is taken up, beware that pokemorph is also implicated to anthro, before being aliased to pokémorph. That may cause odd behavior.

31h253 said:
Pokémorph is currently implicated to anthro, but the correct tag for it to be implicated to would be anthrofied.

If this change is taken up, beware that pokemorph is also implicated to anthro, before being aliased to pokémorph. That may cause odd behavior.

This would be a great implication. I'm doing it if no one disagrees.

Also, what are your thoughts on anthrofied in general?

Rainbow_Dash said:
Also, what are your thoughts on anthrofied in general?

I don't like point 2 in its definition. IMO feral animal that has human cock is still feral animal with human cock. Similarly feral animal with human breasts should also be only feral animal with human breasts.

Like this
WARNING! YOU PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO SEE THIS
post #219000

Also, what is the status of anthro tag?

Wiki clearly says, that it should be applied only when other feral animal is on pic - therefore all anthro -feral are incorrectly tagged. But I've learned the hard way that not all admins agree to that. There was supposed to be discussion about this tag, but I haven't seen any.

I like how we have to make up a new word to do the job of anthropomorph because it's so overused in this fandom.

Alright hijacking thread

Let's lay it down right here and now what we want to (and think is best used as) use the tags anthro and anthrofied for

Having anthro only be applied to "pictures that have feral animals in addition to one or more anthro characters" is really weird in my opinion. The actual use case of the tag can in almost no way be inferred from the tag's name. Furthermore, I question the search demand for such pictures and whether people who do want to find them are even aware of anthro's special usage.

If we really need a tag for that purpose, I'd suggest something like anthro_with_feral to complement the existing anthro_on_feral. I'd then suggest that anthro and its aliases either take the place of or be aliased to anthrofied, that is, be applied to all images depicting non-animal-based anthropomorphs. Doing all this would make each tag's actual purpose significantly more clear to the average viewer.

Rainbow_Dash said:
Alright hijacking thread

Let's lay it down right here and now what we want to (and think is best used as) use the tags anthro and anthrofied for

I would want to tag anthrofied be used when typically feral character is transformed to form, that would be tagged anthro, if we ignore wiki fragment:

It is unnecessary and self-defeating to tag any and all posts with anthropomorphic characters anthro

To be precise, IMO it would be stupid if anthrofied tag wouldn't be deeply connected to anthro tag.

As for anthro I'm okay either with tagging all anthro characters tagged anthro, or leaving it the way it is now described in wiki. I just want the rules be established already.

But, when it comes to where should be line between anthro, and feral I have no clue.

I know for sure that in mlp fim case:

FERAL:
post #258813

ANTHRO:
post #258672

but I'm never sure of anything like

post #147466

character still looks like she can stand on four hooves comfortably, but she's standing on two. If she were flying I would be sure that it's still feral pegasus flying upwards, but in that context I'm not sure.

anthrofied requires outside knowledge to tag. I don't know how I feel about that.

You both bring up good points. I think we need an implication of anthrofied -> anthro or maybe even an alias. Basically I want it so that we only have anthro on things that won't be anthro by default.

Now I have two problems...

1) Do we even need anthro on pictures of anthro on feral? I think yes so people can filter only anthro and feral things, so maybe have anthro_on_feral -> anthro imply. Then do we need to have some sort of tag like anthro_with_feral in addition to anthro on feral? I think not; we can just perhaps have anthro_and_feral + sex to yield the same result, and yet not have it limited to just anthro on feral (as in sex)

2) What are we going to have these in the middle pictures of mostly MLP tagged as? Everyone's definition of feral varies and it's hard to set an exact precursor to look at. I suggested it once before that perhaps we could have it so that the middle ground MLP pics that are really in between can just be left without feral or anthro like most of our content. Then have only the really feral looking ones tagged feral. This only leaves us to set at the very least a rough standard for feral. Thoughts?

I'm thinking we factor in intelligence, as well as clothing, fingers, toes, standing upright, manipulating objects (might go in hand with intellect) and body structure

null0010 said:
anthrofied requires outside knowledge to tag. I don't know how I feel about that.

Hmmm, I agree that I really don't like having outside knowledge for anything, but here I'd say the benefits outweigh that factor, like by a lot because ~anthro ~anthrofied mlp is my second favorite search

null0010 said:
anthrofied requires outside knowledge to tag. I don't know how I feel about that.

I agree with this. anthrofied is stupid and smells.

ippiki_ookami said:
I agree with this. anthrofied is stupid and smells.

smullz liek wut?

Rainbow_Dash said:
1) Do we even need anthro on pictures of anthro on feral? I think yes so people can filter only anthro and feral things, so maybe have anthro_on_feral -> anthro imply. Then do we need to have some sort of tag like anthro_with_feral in addition to anthro on feral? I think not; we can just perhaps have anthro_and_feral + sex to yield the same result, and yet not have it limited to just anthro on feral (as in sex)

I like the idea of an anthro_and_feral tag for images with both anthros and ferals present in the shot, but I'd suggest that bestiality be extended so that anthro_and_feral bestiality works as anthro_on_feral had. That way you don't have things like an image of two anthro characters having sex while a squirrel or something is visible in the background showing up in the search as it would with anthro_and_feral sex.

null0010 said:
anthrofied requires outside knowledge to tag. I don't know how I feel about that.

Well so does pokemorph, yet there is obviously demand for such a thing. The problem we're coming to is that if this tag or its replacement is to apply to fictional classes of objects (e.g. mlp ponies or pokemon), it's going to have to fall under the same outside-info exception held by character tags.

I'm okay with this having using outside information as the demand and use is just high enough; and really it's almost common knowledge to know that pokemon and ponies are feral by default so it's not stretching it that far and it's still very clearly defined, which is the more important factor.

MushBus I like that first idea, too

Alright I am doing it tomorrow if no one bricks me in the face with a no

I see a reason, why there should be tag anthro_on_feral - making a difference, between anthro bestiality, and bestiality. I don't like idea, of extending bestiality to anthro bestiality, and I'm sure there was whole thread about it before. If it will be done, then implication bestiality -> interspecies must be removed firstly, because anthro fox on feral fox is not interspecies.

I'm against anthro_and_feral tag. It's simpler, and more logical, to tag all antrhos with anthro tag, and searching for anthro feral We already have tools, for doing "and" in tags.

I like anthrofied tag, because it can help searching for specific pictures. Like searching for anthrofied ponies from fim, instead of feral pony, with OC anthro character. But if it's going to be not used, then furrification need to be deleted also. If not, then the latter needs more love.

Rainbow_Dash said:

2) What are we going to have these in the middle pictures of mostly MLP tagged as? Everyone's definition of feral varies and it's hard to set an exact precursor to look at.

Non-anthro was aliased to feral, so I'm really for definition, that every character that look like feral animal should be described by this tag.

Intelligence, and clothing shouldn't really matter.

I think that rather good rule is whether character is bipedal, but as I've said sometimes it's hard to tell from picture.

Alright, how about we have anthro_on_feral aliased to anthro_with_feral and then instead of extending bestiality to include ferals, we just use anthro_with_feral and sex to find those

Now do we have anthro_with_feral imply anthro and feral? would make sense to me but I might be wrong

Anthrofied is going to stay because I just love it and it really has a purpose to serve

As for mlp ferals, what if it's in between we just leave off either tag? Like we have ambiguous_gender we can just choose not to have them tagged with either

Wait what? After all that we're just changing an "on" to a "with"? What was wrong with extending bestiality besides having to change 1 implication?

It's simpler, and more logical, to tag all antrhos with anthro tag, and searching for anthro feral We already have tools, for doing "and" in tags.

The problem with that is tagging almost every image on the site with anthro would cause crazy tag bloat, and keeping anthro's current use case is unintuitive. An anthro_and_feral tag would effectively function like anthro does now except it would describe its use case in its tag name.

With the anthro tag freed up, we could use it in the place of anthrofied, replacing a word that barely exists outside this site.

MaShCr said:
Wait what? After all that we're just changing an "on" to a "with"? What was wrong with extending bestiality besides having to change 1 implication?

forum #46432 and for me it's intuitive for bestiality to refer only to humanXferal.

The problem with that is tagging almost every image on the site with anthro would cause crazy tag bloat, and keeping anthro's current use case is unintuitive. An anthro_and_feral tag would effectively function like anthro does now except it would describe its use case in its tag name.

The tag bloat is problem, but I think it is counterweighted, by intuitiveness of current system, and awkwardness of potential anthro_with_feral tag. Tag bloat is not a good thing, but I think that other solutions are even worse.
Also, since MLP FIM, maybe it's not a tag bloat anymore

With the anthro tag freed up, we could use it in the place of anthrofied, replacing a word that barely exists outside this site.

No, anthrofied means feral turned to anthro. It has completely different meaning then anthro alone. I'm only for implication anthrofied -> anthro, if anthro will be used as bloat tag.

Anthrofied is very heavily used here. I don't see why we should delete popular and useful tags just because nobody else uses them.

It only shows that this site is better then other sites. B)

Let's handle this one line at a time

What I mean is, change anthro_on_feral to anthro_with_feral, so that it can include any picture of an anthro being with a feral, sexual or not. Then one can tag anthro_with_feral + sex to find the sexual ones, etc, etc,

Next, bestiality is going to stay on only non anthro ones because it's true that a feral fox and an anthro fox wouldn't really be bestiality I don't think

Now anthrofied is simple: posts that contain a character that was feral but is no longer feral and is no anthro, thus implying anthro (maybe as it might be nice to be able to have a search available like anthrofied -anthro to find only posts where the characters were previously feral but this is not worth it in my opinion)

And finally, I think having anthro on only posts where there is feral and anthro sex isn't a very good rule at all. It should also apply to posts like where a character is anthrofied. Or.... we could just keep anthro on only anthro + feral images and have anthrofied solely for anthrofied (with no anthro implication) so that as I said before, we can search anthrofied -anthro for only anthrofied characters

Without quotations I don't know if it's referring to mine post, but I don't see such a statement in MaShCr posts either, so...

Rainbow_Dash said:
What I mean is, change anthro_on_feral to anthro_with_feral, so that it can include any picture of an anthro being with a feral, sexual or not. Then one can tag anthro_with_feral + sex to find the sexual ones, etc, etc,

(...)

And finally, I think having anthro on only posts where there is feral and anthro sex isn't a very good rule at all.

I'm not for adding anthro tag only in explicit pictures.
I think I'm for:
1. Tagging anthro tag, to any picture in which there is any anthro character. Changing what was before
2. Tagging feral tag to any picture in which there is any feral character. Like it was before
3. Not adding anthro_with_feral tag. People can use instead anthro feral Like it was before
4. Keeping anthro_on_feral, because feral anthro sex gives too many false positives. Also because if it was to be removed then by similar logic bestiality should be removed for feral human sex Like it was before

I know that point 1 will make anthro tag to be added to many pictures, but IMO alternatives are worse.

anomaly said:
1. Tagging anthro tag, to any picture in which there is any anthro character. Changing what was before

If this point is implemented, then the rest of your points describe a working system that I would have no problem with. However, because I don't know the backend effects of tag bloat on the server, I cannot effectively weigh the pros and cons of doing so.

Rainbow Dash said:
What I mean is, change anthro_on_feral to anthro_with_feral, so that it can include any picture of an anthro being with a feral, sexual or not. Then one can tag anthro_with_feral + sex to find the sexual ones, etc, etc,

I'll agree to this with the stipulation that anthro_with_feral must only describe direct interactions between the individuals involved. Each must be aware of the other's presence and each's actions must be affected by that knowledge in some way. In short, they must be doing things together, unlike my previous example of a squirrel somewhere in the background.

Of course, this must also accompany the removal of anthro_on_feral and the current use case of anthro.

Now anthrofied is simple: posts that contain a character that was feral but is no longer feral and is no anthro, thus implying anthro (maybe as it might be nice to be able to have a search available like anthrofied -anthro to find only posts where the characters were previously feral but this is not worth it in my opinion)

I was under the impression that anthrofied is to be used on posts that contain anything in an anthropomorphic state that isn't usually, be it a pony or a toaster. That would fit the classical definition of anthropomorphism, which is why I'd like to use the newly-freed anthropomorphized tag instead, because it's the term used by the rest of the world.

Also, more special use cases for anthro get us nowhere.

MaShCr said:
Well so does pokemorph, yet there is obviously demand for such a thing. The problem we're coming to is that if this tag or its replacement is to apply to fictional classes of objects (e.g. mlp ponies or pokemon), it's going to have to fall under the same outside-info exception held by character tags.

The more exceptions we make to tag_what_you_see, the weaker the rule becomes.

null0010 said:
The more exceptions we make to tag_what_you_see, the weaker the rule becomes.

Still anthrrofied was used over 2500 times already, and I think that this also should be taken into account.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't anthrofied more generalized version of pokemorph? If one of those two tags should not exists then it should be pokemorph, and it should be aliased to anthrofied.

I dunno, it looks to me like we could avoid issues with requiring outside knowledge - and undercutting TWYS if we just used "anthromorph."

Generalizing "anthrofied" into "anthromorph" - that is to say, something that exhibits humanlike characteristics - seems more fluid; "This is anthropomoporphic" versus "this wasn't anthropomorphic but it is now."
The first will always be true, but not the latter.

Also I don't like the word "anthrofied." It sounds like someone just made it up on the spot.

Laevateinn said:
I dunno, it looks to me like we could avoid issues with requiring outside knowledge - and undercutting TWYS if we just used "anthromorph."

Generalizing "anthrofied" into "anthromorph" - that is to say, something that exhibits humanlike characteristics - seems more fluid; "This is anthropomoporphic" versus "this wasn't anthropomorphic but it is now."
The first will always be true, but not the latter.

Also I don't like the word "anthrofied." It sounds like someone just made it up on the spot.

That would literally require a tag on every image on the site that depicts an anthro furry, human, or anything else human-shaped. It would be an even bigger bloat tag than anomaly's proposal for anthro.

I think I am going to push through my previous statement.

Anthro is only on images with and anthro and feral character involved in some way (not outright sexual, see next point I make) to avoid big tag bloat as if a tag is on every image or the high 95 percent then it doesn't need to be tagged

Anthro_on_feral will be aliased to anthro_with_feral so that it can be extended to include images with like an anthro and feral kissing or sleeping (so doesn't have to be sexual)

Bestiality stays as is (only if it includes a human, otherwise use anthro_with_feral)

Anthrofied stays as the term for characters that were once feral(or are predominantly feral) and are now anthro. This tag relies on character info, which is already obtained from outside information so its not adding an exception to the rule any more than we have

These might not be perfect, true they might not work, but I think these are the best solution we have and we can at least try them out and reevaluate if necessary

On a sidenote, it seems like anthro on feral currently (as of 3 months ago) implies bestiality, as per forum #43347

titaniachkt said:
On a sidenote, it seems like anthro on feral currently (as of 3 months ago) implies bestiality, as per forum #43347

Hmm, not sure how I feel about that, bu I suppose I'll carry it over, wait no, because anthro_with_feral isn't the same thing, and as much foresight and planning as that took, I think that bestiality is going to be on it's own, example, a feral fox and anthro fox is still the same species I think

So what's the point of keeping anthro around again if we have anthro_with_feral?

MaShCr said:
So what's the point of keeping anthro around again if we have anthro_with_feral?

because we don't

So the plan is:

• Delete anthro
• Create anthro_with_feral
• Remove implication anthro_on_feral -> bestiality
• Alias anthro_on_feral -> anthro_with_feral

am I correct?

anomaly said:
So the plan is:

• Delete anthro

No. If we have a feral tag, then we should have an anthro tag as well.

anomaly said:

• Create anthro_with_feral

Sure.

anomaly said:

• Remove implication anthro_on_feral -> bestiality

Changing anthro_on_feral to anthro_with_feral creates broader implications, so undoing that would make sense. But a sapient individual, anthro or human, sexing a feral critter should be tagged as bestiality.

anomaly said:

• Alias anthro_on_feral -> anthro_with_feral

This could work.

Okay, I've said at some point, what I've got to say (That I personally would only change that anthro tag would be applied to all pics with any anthro char.), so I'm out from this. Could you just tell in the end what are official tagging rules, so this forum thread can be mentioned in anthro wiki?

Because, as I said, my main motivation of writing about this tag, is fact that it looks like many admins have different opinions on this, and that leads to many misunderstandings.

Rainbow_Dash said:
Alright I am doing it tomorrow if no one bricks me in the face with a no

Thanks ippiki, you're like Santa but with a sack full of bricks bacon instead.

And thanks for waiting until after everyone had finished debating before letting them know that all their hard thoughts and carefully written arguments meant absolutely nothing being a bit more open minded in your edit.

Merry Christmas to you too.

MaShCr said:
Thanks ippiki, you're like Santa but with a sack full of bricks instead.

And thanks for waiting until after everyone had finished debating before letting them know that all their hard thoughts and carefully written arguments meant absolutely nothing.

Merry Christmas to you too.

Sorry, I wasn't notified that I'm not entitled to an opinion.

ippiki_ookami said:
No. If we have a feral tag, then we should have an anthro tag as well.

Most definitely

No. A sapient individual, anthro or human, sexing a feral critter should be tagged as bestiality.

That sort of defeats the purpose of the anthro on/with feral tag though, since it no longer creates 3 distinct furry/non-furry categories (feral, human & anthro); i.e:

Bestiality: Feral + Human
Anthro on/with feral: Anthro + Feral
Feral on Feral: Feral + Feral
Human on Anthro: Human + Anthro

ippiki_ookami said:
Sorry, I wasn't notified that I'm not entitled to an opinion.

Sorry, you are. The original cluster-no in an absolute tone just kinda rubbed me the wrong way.

titaniachkt said:

ippiki ookami said:
No. If we have a feral tag, then we should have an anthro tag as well.

Most definitely

What purpose will it serve though? What will people who search it be trying to find?

Just throwin' in my 2 cents:

I've been removing bestiality tag from pokemon/human and pokemon/anthro pics today. I ran across a snafuu - anthro_on_feral automatically adds bestiality.
However, since Pokemon is short for pocket monsters, and since having with sex a monster isn't bestialty, the tag should be removed.

Could someone get rid of bestialty implication from the anthro_on_feral, please? Thank you.

AshuraK said:
I've been removing bestiality tag from pokemon/human and pokemon/anthro pics today.

You should definitely not do that anymore, unless said pokemon are anthros.

AshuraK said:
since having with sex a monster isn't bestialty, the tag should be removed.

Um, says who?

ippiki_ookami said:
You should definitely not do that anymore, unless said pokemon are anthros.

Just doing my tagging duty. Just tagging what I see.

Um, says who?

Logic and Merriam-Webster.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bestiality

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon

Pokemon is short for pocket monsters, so having sex with a monster isn't bestiality. Bestiality is, and I quote from the Merriam-Webster definition:

3: sexual relations between a human being and a lower animal.

AshuraK said:

What you're saying is that this
post #161935
is not bestiality. Take a step back and think about that. Especially if you want to talk about logic.

A monster would be a lower animal, and regardless, pokemon are considered feral animals. Merium Webster does not take into account anthropomorphic characters either, so it's not a good source of tagging rules. Quoting the dictionary is not a good way to get around here when an admin says that we have our own definition

It's clear now that none of us are going to budge on this, so I'm dropping out of this argument, and moving on to fixing tags on posts that are in need of tag fixing (like adding a penis tag to posts that have a penis when I searched for "male rating:e -penis" for example).