The bulk update request #101 is active.
create implication male_on_bottom (57816) -> on_bottom (107827)
create implication male_on_bottom (57816) -> male (2788441)
create implication female_on_bottom (7816) -> on_bottom (107827)
create implication female_on_bottom (7816) -> female (2806654)
create implication ambiguous_on_bottom (496) -> on_bottom (107827)
create implication ambiguous_on_bottom (496) -> ambiguous_gender (350388)
create implication intersex_on_bottom (2061) -> on_bottom (107827)
create implication intersex_on_bottom (2061) -> intersex (275303)
create implication andromorph_on_bottom (126) -> intersex_on_bottom (2061)
create implication andromorph_on_bottom (126) -> andromorph (26932)
create implication gynomorph_on_bottom (1612) -> intersex_on_bottom (2061)
create implication gynomorph_on_bottom (1612) -> gynomorph (215664)
create implication herm_on_bottom (213) -> intersex_on_bottom (2061)
create implication herm_on_bottom (213) -> herm (30023)
create implication maleherm_on_bottom (59) -> intersex_on_bottom (2061)
create implication maleherm_on_bottom (59) -> maleherm (5037)
create implication cowgirl_position (52942) -> on_bottom (107827)
create implication reverse_cowgirl_position (21112) -> on_bottom (107827)
Reason: There is already a group of tags for on_top, but not for the on_bottom opposite.
Having both <gender>_on_top and <gender>_on_bottom will certainly improve searchability.
on_top and on_bottom themselves might not be directly helpfull, as they will always be both present. They might be replaced by only one tag, or be aliased to on_top_(disambiguation)/on_bottom_(disambiguation).
Thoughts ?
EDIT: The bulk update request #101 (forum #292606) has been approved by @Millcore.
Updated by auto moderator