FYIAD said:
Do you think you could help me make my first fursona I have the specs I just need an artist and yours looks great

NO

WE WILL NOT HELP YOU MAKE A FURSONA SO STOP ASKING COMPLETE STRANGERS TO HELP YOU MAKE YOUR FURSONA.

FFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-

Rage much?

u mad?

darinof2313 said:
u mad?

no this is patrick.

kidahowlette said:
no this is patrick.

*hands over the internet*

W0LF1EB0Y said:
oh Maker....artica you dirty wulfy >:3

woops Fixed x3

kidahowlette said:
no this is patrick.

R
O
F
L

God damn it guys, Artica Sparkle is a herm.

ssm said:
God damn it guys, Artica Sparkle is a herm.

But there are pics out there of hir as a female. Just sayin'.

Herm or not, as far as this pictures concerned hes nothin but a she.

Lol you know a comment thread is good when almost all the comments have been voted down.

The_Great_Rawr said:
Herm or not, as far as this pictures concerned hes nothin but a she.

No, check the source and look at gender. It specifically says Herm.

Wulfeh said:
No, check the source and look at gender. It specifically says Herm.

the golden rule in tagging and any and i mean ANY admin will tell you, tag what you see. if there are breast and no visible penis it doesn't matter if its a herm or a balloon you tag female. PERIOD, i dont like it but rules are rules

Braeburn said:
the golden rule in tagging and any and i mean ANY admin will tell you, tag what you see. if there are breast and no visible penis it doesn't matter if its a herm or a balloon you tag female. PERIOD, i dont like it but rules are rules

http://e621.net/wiki/show?title=tag_what_you_see

"However, less obviously, this also applies to descriptions of the representation or form of the artwork"

I think a gender confirmation in the source counts as a description of the artwork.

Wulfeh said:
http://e621.net/wiki/show?title=tag_what_you_see

"However, less obviously, this also applies to descriptions of the representation or form of the artwork"

I think a gender confirmation in the source counts as a description of the artwork.

http://e621.net/wiki/show?title=tag_what_you_see
In other words, tags should be directly verifiable from the picture itself wherever possible: that way there will be fewer disagreements.

i agree, soo...where is that shown here? i've been looking but see no such thing. seriously if there is ANYTHING in this picture that proves she is a herm i swear i'll put it back myself and apologize yes i KNOW she is a herm but its not SHOWN, this situation has played out countless times with the same result..please its our tagging that makes us elite

Braeburn said:
http://e621.net/wiki/show?title=tag_what_you_see
In other words, tags should be directly verifiable from the picture itself wherever possible: that way there will be fewer disagreements.

i agree, soo...where is that shown here? i've been looking but see no such thing. seriously if there is ANYTHING in this picture that proves she is a herm i swear i'll put it back myself and apologize yes i KNOW she is a herm but its not SHOWN, this situation has played out countless times with the same result..please its our tagging that makes us elite

How elite is our tagging when the artist says the character in the picture is a herm and it's tagged as a female on here? Not very, I'd say.

Wulfeh said:
How elite is our tagging when the artist says the character in the picture is a herm and it's tagged as a female on here? Not very, I'd say.

Rules are rules, stop adding incorrect tags.
People who search "herm" want characters with both genders' features WITHIN the picture, not shown in another pictures or mentionned by the artist or the owner.

There is no indication within this image that the character depicted is a herm. Therefore, tagging it as herm is incorrect. Someone that has NO KNOWLEDGE of this particular character's typical sex will NOT UNDERSTAND why this picture would be tagged herm, when there is absolutely no evidence to support that the character is in fact a herm in this particular image.

It doesn't matter what the artist says, it doesn't matter what the character owner says, it doesn't matter what ANYONE says. Can you tell with absolutely certainty that there is a herm in this picture? No, you can't. Any further tagging of this image as "herm" will not be tolerated. From all indications, it contains a male and a female, and should be tagged as such.

Shit, well there it is. Admin hands down the law. We're living in a fantasy land here, folks. Nothing outside this site matters. Certainly not the truth. I sincerely apologize then for changing the tags. I do recommend "However, less obviously, this also applies to descriptions of the representation or form of the artwork, its style, or the themes involved." be taken out of the tag what you see, as it is clearly ignored though. Not that my recommendation is anything at all. Once again, sorry for wasting your time.

Wulfeh said:
Shit, well there it is. Admin hands down the law. We're living in a fantasy land here, folks. Nothing outside this site matters. Certainly not the truth. I sincerely apologize then for changing the tags. I do recommend "However, less obviously, this also applies to descriptions of the representation or form of the artwork, its style, or the themes involved." be taken out of the tag what you see, as it is clearly ignored though. Not that my recommendation is anything at all. Once again, sorry for wasting your time.

Mad as fucking hell.

ExplosiveBlaziken said:
Mad as fucking hell.

Just very disappointed.

Wulfeh said:
Shit, well there it is. Admin hands down the law. We're living in a fantasy land here, folks. Nothing outside this site matters. Certainly not the truth. I sincerely apologize then for changing the tags. I do recommend "However, less obviously, this also applies to descriptions of the representation or form of the artwork, its style, or the themes involved." be taken out of the tag what you see, as it is clearly ignored though. Not that my recommendation is anything at all. Once again, sorry for wasting your time.

This does not mean that information external to the picture TRUMPS the information that you derive from the picture itself, but it's worded confusingly enough that I'd rather just remove it entirely.

Char said:
This does not mean that information external to the picture TRUMPS the information that you derive from the picture itself, but it's worded confusingly enough that I'd rather just remove it entirely.

Thanks, It's nice to know it can be seen where I'm coming from at least. I agree though, if the information about the picture can't trump what's in it, then there is no need for that extra wording. It feels like the art is being misrepresented, and if I drew something I'd want it tagged as what it was, not what it looked like. Either way, I'm gonna move off this now. Take a deep breath, forget it, and try to be less trouble.

Char said:
This does not mean that information external to the picture TRUMPS the information that you derive from the picture itself, but it's worded confusingly enough that I'd rather just remove it entirely.

there might not be a sign of either being herm or not but most of artica sparkle are her as a herm so thats why someone would tag this with herm cause she is seen and known as a herm

Yet this picture does not have anything indicating herm in it. No need to put an extraneous tag in that triggers blacklists inaccurately.

so much autism in this thread. it's a porn imageboard. the tags are for finding pictures to masturbate to. they are not for you to build a portfolio of identity around your imaginary furry internet alter-ego. your character will not be any more or less real because a porn imageboard has a correctly- or incorrectly-tagged gender on it. shut. the fuck. up. tag what you see.

anon420 said:
Yet this picture does not have anything indicating herm in it. No need to put an extraneous tag in that triggers blacklists inaccurately.

Alternatively, I have "female" blacklisted, but I know these characters are herms. However, since the image portrays what could be EITHER a female OR a herm (despite it being a herm by the artist's admission, other character images, etc. etc.), I'm not going to see it, since I have "female" blacklisted.

It can go both ways.

Snowmew said:
Alternatively, I have "female" blacklisted, but I know these characters are herms. However, since the image portrays what could be EITHER a female OR a herm (despite it being a herm by the artist's admission, other character images, etc. etc.), I'm not going to see it, since I have "female" blacklisted.

It can go both ways.

No, no it can't. One way involves tagging what you see because that is what is in the image. The other involves making wide-ranging assumptions that will clutter the tags on a lot of pictures.

For example, your way involves tagging every picture of a woman that doesn't show her genitals as both 'female' and 'herm' because we can't be sure that there's not a penis hiding down there, even though we have no evidence at all from the picture. And while we're at it, I guess we'd have to tag every male with 'cuntboy' as well if we can't see a penis, cause you know, we can't be sure what 'he' is sporting. And then god help us on what we'd do with characters that are actually ambiguous.

Oooor, we could keep ourselves SANE, and tag what we see, instead of what we found out from outside the picture. Outside info belongs in wiki pages, not tags.

Btw, why would you blacklist 'female' and then be upset when you miss out on herm pics? There's kind of a large overlap there.

anon420 said:

No, no it can't. One way involves tagging what you see because that is what is in the image. The other involves making wide-ranging assumptions that will clutter the tags on a lot of pictures.

For example, your way involves tagging every picture of a woman that doesn't show her genitals as both 'female' and 'herm' because we can't be sure that there's not a penis hiding down there, even though we have no evidence at all from the picture. And while we're at it, I guess we'd have to tag every male with 'cuntboy' as well if we can't see a penis, cause you know, we can't be sure what 'he' is sporting. And then god help us on what we'd do with characters that are actually ambiguous.

Oooor, we could keep ourselves SANE, and tag what we see, instead of what we found out from outside the picture. Outside info belongs in wiki pages, not tags.

Btw, why would you blacklist 'female' and then be upset when you miss out on herm pics? There's kind of a large overlap there.

What if it's Artica Sparkle that he wants to jack off to? He wants to see dick, whether there be pussy attached or not. A lack of dick turns him off. Is that really so foreign to the community? Blacklisting female would have one less picture of Sparkle for his folder. And I can vouch, that sucks.

Nev4da said:
But there are pics out there of hir as a female. Just sayin'.

That's just the artists take on her, officially she's a herm