The tag implication #43629 slave_auction -> auction has been approved.

Reason: An auction is a process of buying and selling goods or services by offering them up for bids, taking bids, and then selling the item to the highest bidder or buying the item from the lowest bidder.

Auctions are applied for trade in diverse contexts, such as antiques, paintings, rare collectibles, expensive wines, commodities, livestock, radio spectrum, used cars, online advertising and slaves.

EDIT: The tag implication slave_auction -> auction (forum #329577) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.

Auction should probably be disambiguated. I see a number of posts using it to mean the image itself was auctioned off (or it was made from a YCH auction), which is an invalid use, rather than the intended use of characters being on display for sale.

watsit said:
Auction should probably be disambiguated. I see a number of posts using it to mean the image itself was auctioned off (or it was made from a YCH auction), which is an invalid use, rather than the intended use of characters being on display for sale.

What suffix could be attached to that to separate it from others? auction_(economy)?

furrin_gok said:
What suffix could be attached to that to separate it from others? auction_(economy)?

I'd almost say slave_auction could work for that, since the treatment of a person as property (to sell or give to another for money or some other compensation) is what a slave is. Is it possible for a character to not be a slave if they're being sold or offered up for sale at auction?

watsit said:
I'd almost say slave_auction could work for that, since the treatment of a person as property (to sell or give to another for money or some other compensation) is what a slave is. Is it possible for a character to not be a slave if they're being sold or offered up for sale at auction?

I think you misunderstood me. Gatto's trying to implicate slave_auction to the kind of auction that's there for selling anything, whether a person or an object. What suffix would you give to that broad concept of an auction?

furrin_gok said:
I think you misunderstood me. Gatto's trying to implicate slave_auction to the kind of auction that's there for selling anything, whether a person or an object. What suffix would you give to that broad concept of an auction?

Auction is only for characters, it's not for non-living objects:

Describes when characters are presented for sale. Usually overlaps with bound. Slave often applies as well.

Characters only selling sexual services should be labeled prostitution.

And I don't think there can be a case where someone is auctioned off for sale where they're not some kind of slave. At most, they may not be a slave currently, but they would be auctioning themself off to become a slave upon completion of the transaction, so the term could still apply.

There currently isn't a tag that I'm aware of that's for a general auction involving non-living objects. I'm also not sure I could come up with a term that couldn't be taken to apply to the image itself or a character being auctioned off IRL.

watsit said:
Auction is only for characters, it's not for non-living objects:

The wiki page is simply not correct in this case. Anyone with an account can create or edit those and they should not be treated as absolute truth. Sometimes e621 does use a site-specific definition for a common word or term, but only if there is a good reason to do so.

post #1859388 is clearly an auction, and no characters are being sold.

gattonero2001 said:
The wiki page is simply not correct in this case. Anyone with an account can create or edit those and they should not be treated as absolute truth.

And anyone with an account can add tags to posts, and the wiki shouldn't be assumed wrong just because it's on an image the wiki doesn't say it should be.

I have already removed the auction tag from several posts that were advertising the image itself (or the character displayed in the image) to be or have been auctioned IRL. Currently, the entire first of three page of results is consistent with the wiki (I have not run into, let alone removed the tag from, posts using the tag for general object auctions), and no doubt the remaining two pages I haven't looked at have some more mistagged for IRL auctions with more consistent with the wiki.

If you want to change the usage of the tag to include non-character auctions, that should be a separate discussion. But auction itself is ambiguous (as noted by many posts using it to advertise IRL image/character auctions) and should be disambiguated, and the current intended use of the tag fits with slave_auction.

Also, you shouldn't edit wiki pages like that and change the meaning of tags without proper discussion.

watsit said:
Also, you shouldn't edit wiki pages like that and change the meaning of tags without proper discussion.

Considering how obvious it was that the tag was written incorrectly, by said people not holding a proper discussion, no he really didn't. Just because you haven't been finding them doesn't mean they don't exist.

furrin_gok said:
Considering how obvious it was that the tag was written incorrectly, by said people not holding a proper discussion, no he really didn't.

So he didn't not change the wiki to change the meaning of the tag without discussion? It seems quite obvious to me he did. He wasn't cleaning up a defaced wiki page, this has been the usage of the tag since the beginning which the wiki properly described. Just because you don't like how the tag isn't general enough doesn't mean you can change it as you want without discussion. Especially when there's an open question if the tag should remain valid.

EDIT:
And I just checked, that post he provided is literally the only example of the tag being used for a non-character auction. That one post is from about 3 years ago, the wiki was first written a bit over 5 years ago, and the oldest use of the tag is 14 years ago filling nearly three pages of results, so no, the wiki and tag description aren't incorrect.

Let's not wage edit wars on the wiki pages. I find myself agreeing with Watsit here.
I think the best course of action would be to disambiguate the tag into three broad categories:

1. slave_auction – most posts tagged auction are already tagged as such, and those that aren't should be.
2. item_auction (please suggest a better name) – if either what's being auctioned off isn't visible, or it's items that are being sold
3. auction_result (to mirror ych_result) – for posts that are a result of an auction held by the artist.

The last one is more debatable, as ych_result that it's based on is itself on shaky grounds TWYS-wise.
However, because of point 3, we can't really use auction as an umbrella tag for both 1 and 2. People will keep mistagging it regardless.

bitwolfy said:
I think the best course of action would be to disambiguate the tag into three broad categories:

1. slave_auction – most posts tagged auction are already tagged as such, and those that aren't should be.
2. item_auction (please suggest a better name) – if either what's being auctioned off isn't visible, or it's items that are being sold

Perhaps auction_(event) could be used for an umbrella object-or-character auction, so auction_(event) -slave_auction would get you images depicting non-character auctions. object_auction is the best I can think of for non-character auctions specifically, but item_auction sounds better (if still a bit off-sounding).

Characters can be auctioned as if they were objects, with no indication that they will become slaves. post #1809758

gattonero2001 said:
Characters can be auctioned as if they were objects, with no indication that they will become slaves. post #1809758

I would still call that a slave since it is treating a person as property. You can't auction off/sell a person like that if they weren't treated as property, i.e. a slave. A slave doesn't have to be a work slave or provide some unpaid service to their owner, just that they're owned as property.

watsit said:
I would still call that a slave since it is treating a person as property. You can't auction off/sell a person like that if they weren't treated as property, i.e. a slave. A slave doesn't have to be a work slave or provide some unpaid service to their owner, just that they're owned as property.

post #1902344 post #2784116
There are times where it seems like a person is being auctioned, but without any actual sign of it being for slavery. Could be sex, dating, etc.

furrin_gok said:
There are times where it seems like a person is being auctioned, but without any actual sign of it being for slavery. Could be sex, dating, etc.

According to the wiki, characters only selling sexual services, rather than themselves, should be tagged prostitution:

Auction says:
Characters only selling sexual services should be labeled prostitution.

If it's too ambiguous to tell what's being sold (the character themself, or a service the character willingly performs for payment), a generic auction tag like auction_(event) could be used instead.

watsit said:
According to the wiki, characters only selling sexual services, rather than themselves, should be tagged prostitution:

I suppose that argument works for the second image--while we don't know that they're selling sexual services, we do know they're presenting their own prices. It doesn't apply to that first image though, as there's an actual auctioneer for it.

If it's too ambiguous to tell what's being sold (the character themself, or a service the character willingly performs for payment), a generic auction tag like auction_(event) could be used instead.

The problem there lies in finding those more ambiguous but still people auctions. auction_(event) -item_auction -slave_auction feels like a bad solution when you can just as easily have a person_auction between slave and event.
post #2474720
And what about images like this? Unlike your average slave auction piece, they all look happy to be presented.
In a slaver's world, slaves should be happy to have the chance to get a master, so it does make sense, but that also somewhat relies on the text. The characters on stage are all wearing collars and bracelets, but they aren't actually bound in any way. bondage vs -bondage only goes so far on that, there's also "willing" vs "unwilling" regardless of bindings.

The tag implication slave_auction -> auction (forum #329577) has been approved by @Rainbow_Dash.