I'm not sure how this alias got created, but I offer post #808 as evidence. For that matter, I offer pretty much anything mithra that has visible feet.

I'm noticing that there are other pictures tagged "paws" that don't have what I would describe as paws. For that matter, there are results in the search "human not_furry paws"... how can this be?

furries

I think the alias was originally supposed to be reversed, but as we can all see it simply did not go through.

maybe we should set up an implication the other way?

hindpaw implied foot?

The one that confuses me is "paws" paws -hindpaw doesn't seem to generally bring up front paws in particular.

also, pawpad should probably imply paw.

I wouldn't reverse the implication, because it seem to me that foot =/= paw in general. I know some furries think it's cute to make these substitutions in language, but I don't think it's helpful from a tagging perspective.

My fursona has paws. Baloo the bear from Disney's Tarzan has paws. I have feet which are distinctly human-like, and so do mithra.

I'd be okay with trying to meet half-way on the language thing and reserve the tag "foot" for distinctly human feet, and leave all other ground-pounding appendages to whatever people want to call them. It just seems mistaken to call human feet "paws".

That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.

But seriously, I'm necroing this because it needs to be addressed. Human feet are not paws.

I suppose I could get behind removing this. Feet and paws have enough of a distinction to warrant having both tags. It twill require a shit ton of retagging though.

ippiki_ookami said:
I suppose I could get behind removing this. Feet and paws have enough of a distinction to warrant having both tags. It twill require a shit ton of retagging though.

Shhhh...
No tears.
Only dreams now.
We are here forever.
We have time.

furries

E: i will admit that i find feline paws adorable but i have no fetish for them or any other kind of anything like that

In the practical world of e621 tagging, if tail gets aliased away to invalid_tag for being too general a tag to be of much use, so should feet, paws, hands, and hindpaws. It would save on a massive retagging campaign over a small (if any) gain and reduce confusion over what each term means.

If not, then hindpaws should be aliased to feet.

Clawstripe said:
In the practical world of e621 tagging, if tail gets aliased away to invalid_tag for being too general a tag to be of much use, so should feet, paws, hands, and hindpaws. It would save on a massive retagging campaign over a small (if any) gain and reduce confusion over what each term means.

If not, then hindpaws should be aliased to feet.

Feet are too prominent of a theme to be aliased away. Our current thinking is to implicate hindpaw to feet, that way not all feet images say hindpaw but all hindpaw images say feet. This is probably going to be what we do. So if anyone has any objections, speak now, or forever hold your peace.

I simply go out on a limb and say that something between 60 to 80% of pictures on here will or should contain feet as a tag. So, do we really need it or gain something from this tag?

Realistically, though, on every booru I've ever seen which has a "feet" tag, it's used only when feet play a very prominent role in the theme of the image. For the most part, if an image would appeal to people with a foot fetish then tag it with "feet". If not, then leave the tag out.

I know this goes contrary to the "tag what you see" rule, but this rule is stretched pretty thinly around here all the time. Think about it. How many images should be tagged "anthropomorph" on this site, yet when you look at any random image hosted here you're probably 98% certain to see an anthropomorph?

Bottom line: You can go overboard with the "tag what you see" rule, and sometimes you just have to use common sense.

I could get behind that, would need a wikipage though because there is non at the moment and the one for hindpaw is to vague.