The bulk update request #1484 is active.

create alias choking_on_cock (0) -> choking_on_penis (418)
create implication choking_on_penis (418) -> choking (6999)
create implication choking_on_penis (418) -> oral_penetration (109595)
mass update choking_with_tail -> tail_strangling
create implication tail_strangling (15) -> strangling (1172)

Reason: Implementing the suggestions I received in topic #30497 as a BUR.

EDIT: The bulk update request #1484 (forum #319124) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

omegaumbra said:
# duplicate of has blocking transitive relationships,

Frick.
Idk what this means... Is the previous pending implication creating problems with this BUR?

Can I reject the old implication? Or should I just remove this from the BUR and retag the posts... Is just 35.

Yep, that's the only wall. That old request has to be denied for this one to go through.

With the old request denied, this is unblocked now. I also added the implication choking_on_penis -> penis. Maybe I could add choking_on_penis -> oral_penetration?

omegaumbra said:
With the old request denied, this is unblocked now. I also added the implication choking_on_penis -> penis. Maybe I could add choking_on_penis -> oral_penetration?

There was a big debate over whether penis_in_pussy should imply penis or not, with the conclusion ultimately being that you can’t tag penis if it isn’t visible, even though you can tell from an image in other ways if there is a penis in a pussy, ie. via an abdominal bulge or just the position of the characters. So in this case, I wouldn’t imply penis here. Oral penetration should be fine, though.

scaliespe said:
There was a big debate over whether penis_in_pussy should imply penis or not, with the conclusion ultimately being that you can’t tag penis if it isn’t visible, even though you can tell from an image in other ways if there is a penis in a pussy, ie. via an abdominal bulge or just the position of the characters. So in this case, I wouldn’t imply penis here. Oral penetration should be fine, though.

Makes sense, done.

Should choking with tail go to strangling instead, perhaps?

scaliespe said:
Should choking with tail go to strangling instead, perhaps?

Analyzing the tag, I think that choking with tail sounds more like if the tail is inside the mouth. The way the tag is being used, though, makes me want to rename it as strangled with tail and then do an implication with strangling.

omegaumbra said:
Analyzing the tag, I think that choking with tail sounds more like if the tail is inside the mouth. The way the tag is being used, though, makes me want to rename it as strangled with tail and then do an implication with strangling.

That would be better. Or maybe just call it tail_strangling. I think choking_on_tail would make more sense for a tail down the throat.

The bulk update request #1484 (forum #319124) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

auto_moderator said:
The bulk update request #1484 (forum #319124) has been approved by @bitWolfy.

Thank you!
I'm sorry, I didn't meant to rush you!