Implicating underwear_bulge -> bulge.

Reason: It's a bulge

Methinks this should be an alias instead. Any objections?

Riversyde said:
Methinks this should be an alias instead. Any objections?

You don't have to be wearing underwear to have a bulge.

KiwiPotato said:
You don't have to be wearing underwear to have a bulge.

He meant alias underwear_bulge to bulge.
You have to have a bulge for it to be an underwear bulge.

Test-Subject_217601 said:
He meant alias underwear_bulge to bulge.
You have to have a bulge for it to be an underwear bulge.

I knew what he was talking about but it wouldn't make sense. Vole's original implication would be more logical. How are underwear_bulge and bulge exactly the same?

KiwiPotato said:
I knew what he was talking about but it wouldn't make sense. Vole's original implication would be more logical. How are underwear_bulge and bulge exactly the same?

There is an underwear tag. There is a bulge tag. Why have a underwear bulge tag when you can just search for both the underwear tag and the bulge tag?

Alias dat shit

Dat shit be aliased