tf these fools doin, aint they fire type or somthing wtff!!! my lore!!!!!!!! fuck!!!

dacad said:
tf these fools doin, aint they fire type or somthing wtff!!! my lore!!!!!!!! fuck!!!

Why'd you draw 'em in the water then huh huh huh huh? ,':^|

dacad said:
tf these fools doin, aint they fire type or somthing wtff!!! my lore!!!!!!!! fuck!!!

Its Super Effective!!!

Bunny~

Too hot for FA

Very hot

Would absolutely love more of those two!

They've gone rabid! Wait... rabbit? Rabble? Rancid? fuck

This... now this, this is hot~

Bunnies doin what bunnies do best- bunnies

Wait, so, in terms of tagging, as of now, Dacad initially posted this work without the 'young' or 'cub' tag. A ban evader added those tags, and then a back-and-forth tagging war began with those tags. An admin has now locked the 'young' tag, but the 'cub' tag has been removed. Dacad clearly didn't intend for either of these characters to be visually minors, and based on the tagging war, it's not exactly clear cut. I might be misunderstanding what the 'cub' tag is for, but if the 'young' tag is locked, and there are only furries here, it feels like the post should be tagged 'cub'. But should 'young' have even been locked? Is this a case where the 'adult_(lore)' tag is supposed to be used?

I might just be overthinking this

Edit: Okay, so now '-cub' is locked. And people have been back and forth adding and removing both 'child' and 'teenager'. As of now, 'child' stands. But, once again, shouldn't both 'young' and 'child' imply 'cub' in this work, where only furries are depicted? I keep rereading the wiki page, hoping to come to some sort of new understanding, but it feels like an unresolvable contradiction. Is 'child' a correct tag? If 'young' holds, but 'cub' does not... Well, either 'child' or 'teenager' and 'young' and 'cub' should be present, or none of them should be. This is a fascinating quirk of e6 tagging, I'm living for it.

kadorath said:
Wait, so, in terms of tagging, as of now, Dacad initially posted this work without the 'young' or 'cub' tag. A ban evader added those tags, and then a back-and-forth tagging war began with those tags. An admin has now locked the 'young' tag, but the 'cub' tag has been removed. Dacad clearly didn't intend for either of these characters to be visually minors, and based on the tagging war, it's not exactly clear cut. I might be misunderstanding what the 'cub' tag is for, but if the 'young' tag is locked, and there are only furries here, it feels like the post should be tagged 'cub'. But should 'young' have even been locked? Is this a case where the 'adult_(lore)' tag is supposed to be used?

I might just be overthinking this

Yeah, doesn't look like cub to me, though it looks like it likely got removed from FA due to their idiotic new rule all the same.

kadorath said:
Wait, so, in terms of tagging, as of now, Dacad initially posted this work without the 'young' or 'cub' tag. A ban evader added those tags, and then a back-and-forth tagging war began with those tags. An admin has now locked the 'young' tag, but the 'cub' tag has been removed. Dacad clearly didn't intend for either of these characters to be visually minors, and based on the tagging war, it's not exactly clear cut. I might be misunderstanding what the 'cub' tag is for, but if the 'young' tag is locked, and there are only furries here, it feels like the post should be tagged 'cub'. But should 'young' have even been locked? Is this a case where the 'adult_(lore)' tag is supposed to be used?

I might just be overthinking this

Edit: Okay, so now '-cub' is locked. And people have been back and forth adding and removing both 'child' and 'teenager'. As of now, 'child' stands. But, once again, shouldn't both 'young' and 'child' imply 'cub' in this work, where only furries are depicted? I keep rereading the wiki page, hoping to come to some sort of new understanding, but it feels like an unresolvable contradiction. Is 'child' a correct tag? If 'young' holds, but 'cub' does not... Well, either 'child' or 'teenager' and 'young' and 'cub' should be present, or none of them should be. This is a fascinating quirk of e6 tagging, I'm living for it.

kadorath said:
Wait, so, in terms of tagging, as of now, Dacad initially posted this work without the 'young' or 'cub' tag. A ban evader added those tags, and then a back-and-forth tagging war began with those tags. An admin has now locked the 'young' tag, but the 'cub' tag has been removed. Dacad clearly didn't intend for either of these characters to be visually minors, and based on the tagging war, it's not exactly clear cut. I might be misunderstanding what the 'cub' tag is for, but if the 'young' tag is locked, and there are only furries here, it feels like the post should be tagged 'cub'. But should 'young' have even been locked? Is this a case where the 'adult_(lore)' tag is supposed to be used?

I might just be overthinking this

Edit: Okay, so now '-cub' is locked. And people have been back and forth adding and removing both 'child' and 'teenager'. As of now, 'child' stands. But, once again, shouldn't both 'young' and 'child' imply 'cub' in this work, where only furries are depicted? I keep rereading the wiki page, hoping to come to some sort of new understanding, but it feels like an unresolvable contradiction. Is 'child' a correct tag? If 'young' holds, but 'cub' does not... Well, either 'child' or 'teenager' and 'young' and 'cub' should be present, or none of them should be. This is a fascinating quirk of e6 tagging, I'm living for it.

inb4 it gets flagged because of dacad's conditional dnp status

PREEEETTTY sure the "cub post april 2023" should also apply to anything tagged young seeing as how the tags work. regardless of how it's been locked as both Cub and Not Cub at the same time (young in this instance would just be synonymous with cub, for the same reasons you've described)

guestblacklistevader said:
inb4 it gets flagged because of dacad's conditional dnp status

PREEEETTTY sure the "cub post april 2023" should also apply to anything tagged young seeing as how the tags work. regardless of how it's been locked as both Cub and Not Cub at the same time (young in this instance would just be synonymous with cub, for the same reasons you've described)

Tell me if im wrong, but I reckon artists who post their own work online are not affected by their own dnp status. Although, Dacad is not verified.

And to be pedantic, a cub is any baby animal. This Scorbunny, in terms of proportions, looks like a teenager. I'm assuming it's for this reason it was locked as '-cub' and '+young' because hes a minor, but not an infant.

guestblacklistevader said:
inb4 it gets flagged because of dacad's conditional dnp status

PREEEETTTY sure the "cub post april 2023" should also apply to anything tagged young seeing as how the tags work

Well, given that Dacad's e6 account is the one that posted it, and that Dacad has removed 'cub' a couple of times in this posts earlier history, I doubt Dacad intended for this to fall under the conditionalDNP, although that might change now.

wolfmanfur said:
Tell me if im wrong, but I reckon artists who post their own work online are not affected by their own dnp status. Although, Dacad is not verified.

And to be pedantic, a cub is any baby animal. This Scorbunny, in terms of proportions, looks like a teenager. I'm assuming it's for this reason it was locked as '-cub' and '+young' because hes a minor, but not an infant.

To be even more pedantic, the e621 definition for the 'cub' tag (link) specifies that "the phrase cub can refer to all physically immature and legally underage characters, ranging from infants, to underage teenagers". In addition, the teenager, child, and young tag wiki pages support the connection to the 'cub' tag in their See Also sections. As written, these tags do seem that they should belong together in a purely furry work like this.

Although, the admin who locked these seemingly contradictory tags has left a neutral feedback message on Dacad's account, where they say, "I'll grant you that only a few appear to be in the much younger range (cub), but the rest are teenage at most." This definitely seems to interpret 'cub' and 'teenager' as two subranges within 'young', although that doesn't quite align with the tags' wiki pages. I do agree with the admin's point that the 'young' tag is useful in order for the blacklist to function. Since the Scorbunny is clearly controversial, it probably is better to err on the side of caution when it comes to user's blacklists.

I mean, I'm not personally too much of a stickler for the rules. I just find all this definitional stuff really fun. Ultimately, I think it would probably be best to have a consistent definition of 'cub', since even the quote I pulled earlier begins with a hedging clause that, if it were stronger, would make 'teenager' and 'cub' clearly separate categories. It would probably be beneficial to clear that up... but it's a pretty important tag, and I'm personally afraid to modify that page. Also I assume that e6 tag wiki pages aren't dictated by... you know, 'case law' like this. So I don't know. It is a bit arcane sometimes.

guestblacklistevader said:
inb4 it gets flagged because of dacad's conditional dnp status

PREEEETTTY sure the "cub post april 2023" should also apply to anything tagged young seeing as how the tags work. regardless of how it's been locked as both Cub and Not Cub at the same time (young in this instance would just be synonymous with cub, for the same reasons you've described)

wolfmanfur said:
Tell me if im wrong, but I reckon artists who post their own work online are not affected by their own dnp status. Although, Dacad is not verified.

And to be pedantic, a cub is any baby animal. This Scorbunny, in terms of proportions, looks like a teenager. I'm assuming it's for this reason it was locked as '-cub' and '+young' because hes a minor, but not an infant.

Its likely that, in practice, it actually means "any post after April 2023 that gets locked with cub by an admin."

kadorath said:
-snip-

Although, the admin who locked these seemingly contradictory tags has left a neutral feedback message on Dacad's account, where they say, "I'll grant you that only a few appear to be in the much younger range (cub), but the rest are teenage at most." This definitely seems to interpret 'cub' and 'teenager' as two subranges within 'young', although that doesn't quite align with the tags' wiki pages. I do agree with the admin's point that the 'young' tag is useful in order for the blacklist to function. Since the Scorbunny is clearly controversial, it probably is better to err on the side of caution when it comes to user's blacklists.

I mean, I'm not personally too much of a stickler for the rules. I just find all this definitional stuff really fun. Ultimately, I think it would probably be best to have a consistent definition of 'cub', since even the quote I pulled earlier begins with a hedging clause that, if it were stronger, would make 'teenager' and 'cub' clearly separate categories. It would probably be beneficial to clear that up... but it's a pretty important tag, and I'm personally afraid to modify that page. Also I assume that e6 tag wiki pages aren't dictated by... you know, 'case law' like this. So I don't know. It is a bit arcane sometimes.

That's the thing, how do you make tagging cub consistent? Aside from the obvious, unambiguous cases, everybody's going to see things differently. Like for this post, I don't really see the scorbunny as appearing physically underage, although I don't disagree to the point where I would file a ticket over it (I mostly removed the tags from this and some of Dacad's other posts because of a persistent ban evader adding them in bad faith.)

The only real indicator is the size difference, the limbs being obscured by the water not really helping matters. While I don't really see any "young" qualities apart from possibly that, I don't really see any "adult/aged" qualities either.

wolfmanfur said:
Tell me if im wrong, but I reckon artists who post their own work online are not affected by their own dnp status. Although, Dacad is not verified.

And to be pedantic, a cub is any baby animal. This Scorbunny, in terms of proportions, looks like a teenager. I'm assuming it's for this reason it was locked as '-cub' and '+young' because hes a minor, but not an infant.

Actually, the first post to lead to the addition to the dnp was posted by Dacad. Same situation happened, except without the contradictory "-cub" locking.

To counter your pedantry, while you aren't wrong when it comes to real life animals... In the furry community, and more importantly on e6 -- the word "cub" is used to describe any anthro character that has not reached adulthood. A teenage anthro would still be called a cub.

werideatdawn said:
Its likely that, in practice, it actually means "any post after April 2023 that gets locked with cub by an admin."

Yeah, that's what I was thinking it meant. Seeing as this is effectively locked as cub but under a different word (what IS a "young anthro" after all?) I would not be surprised if Dacad goes with the same decision as the last time. It'll probably have to result in the dnp status being updated further to add redundancy to prevent this type of situation too. (Seriously, it's tagged as young. There is only anthros in this picture. What else would that indicate other than "cub"? They aren't humans or otherwise non-anthro. This is so silly.)

guestblacklistevader said:
Actually, the first post to lead to the addition to the dnp was posted by Dacad. Same situation happened, except without the contradictory "-cub" locking.

To counter your pedantry, while you aren't wrong when it comes to real life animals... In the furry community, and more importantly on e6 -- the word "cub" is used to describe any anthro character that has not reached adulthood. A teenage anthro would still be called a cub.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking it meant. Seeing as this is effectively locked as cub but under a different word (what IS a "young anthro" after all?) I would not be surprised if Dacad goes with the same decision as the last time. It'll probably have to result in the dnp status being updated further to add redundancy to prevent this type of situation too. (Seriously, it's tagged as young. There is only anthros in this picture. What else would that indicate other than "cub"? They aren't humans or otherwise non-anthro. This is so silly.)

It doesn't have a locked cub tag on it because then it would be taken down according to Dacad's CDNP status.

talentlesshack said:
It doesn't have a locked cub tag on it because then it would be taken down according to Dacad's CDNP status.

But it has the "young" tag locked. Which is effectively the same thing in this instance. There's no humans. The only characters in this image are anthros. Thus, one could come to the conclusion that the "young" tag implies that it's cub. The "young -cub" locking is a very silly contradiction.

Not like I can do anything about it (to my knowledge) anyway, it'd be up to Dacad to request takedown and then further update the CDNP status for redundancy.

dacad said:
tf these fools doin, aint they fire type or somthing wtff!!! my lore!!!!!!!! fuck!!!

Many fire type pokemon can swim, and enjoy the rain though they don't enjoy it during combat. The Charmander evo tree cant swin at all or they die though.