The tag's wiki page says "involuntary full or partial erection" and it was used as such in post #15523 before I edited it.

So, this is a weird one. morning_wood was edited to have that "full or partial" part over 6 years ago, then erection had it's "for full erections only" part edited in a little under 4 years ago. There's an implication request made 9 years ago for morning_wood -> erection, but it doesn't seem to be resolved, although morning wood does imply erection there's no mention of an approver in the implication search. So, someone either went ahead and silently accepted the implication request, then the wikis were edited to contradict the implication, or someone edited the wikis first and then the implication was made in contradiction to the wikis.

In any case, either the implication does need to be removed or the morning wood wiki need to be edited to exclude semi-erect penes.

Way too sleepy to start discussing wood density, but I did wanna say:

So, someone either went ahead and silently accepted the implication request, then the wikis were edited to contradict the implication, or someone edited the wikis first and then the implication was made in contradiction to the wikis.

In the early years, the alias/implication system didn't keep up with as much information as we do today. And that implication was made in 2013... So, this implication wasn't 'silently accepted'... it (and the forum thread) looks how most aliases/implications from that era look. <3 I don't think there is any way that I COULD silently accept an implication if I wanted to.

Back in THOSE days, we manually typed all of the information in by hand, up hills both ways... and had to type our own accepted message even! XD

snowwolf said:
Way too sleepy to start discussing wood density, but I did wanna say:

In the early years, the alias/implication system didn't keep up with as much information as we do today. And that implication was made in 2013... So, this implication wasn't 'silently accepted'... it (and the forum thread) looks how most aliases/implications from that era look. <3 I don't think there is any way that I COULD silently accept an implication if I wanted to.

Back in THOSE days, we manually typed all of the information in by hand, up hills both ways... and had to type our own accepted message even! XD

Oh, sorry. I meant silently accepted as in "without leaving a comment", because I noticed that usually an admin would at least say "I'm approving this", or similar, before making their decision. It irks me when this happens because it made it more difficult to find out what happened during an alias/implication's discussion, it would become whack-a-mole with asking around or waiting for someone to say "yea, I did it". So, that was a Freudian slip there...

siral_exan said:
Oh, sorry. I meant silently accepted as in "without leaving a comment", because I noticed that usually an admin would at least say "I'm approving this", or similar, before making their decision. It irks me when this happens because it made it more difficult to find out what happened during an alias/implication's discussion, it would become whack-a-mole with asking around or waiting for someone to say "yea, I did it". So, that was a Freudian slip there...

Nah, that's valid-- I actually noticed the same thing and figured it was Char, but the lack of confirmation was unfortunate. That said... gosh, old alias and implications were difficult. I don't know how many hours I spent researching, typing up proposals, arguing, typing up new proposals and then just never getting anywhere because no one would say "I like that," despite many people popping up to say "I don't like that."

(the answer is too many hours)
(way too many)