The bulk update request #3401 is pending approval.

create implication among_us_eyes (53) -> among_us_pareidolia (34)
create implication among_us_pareidolia (34) -> among_us (1879)
create implication ambient_impostor_(among_us) (2) -> ambient_among_us (1584)
create implication ambient_among_us (1584) -> among_us (1879)
create implication amogus_(stonetoss) (3) -> stonetoss_(parody) (19)
create implication amogus_(stonetoss) (3) -> among_us (1879)

Reason: amogus -crewmate_(among_us) -impostor_(among_us)
amogus -among_us
Several of these posts completely lack amogii, and even if we want to have this tag, characters shaped like amogii are completely different concept than eyes/textures including amogii. An additional tag for the Stonetoss edit featuring an amogus might also be warranted, for cases like post #2727325.

Kind of sus of you to try and get rid of crew mates like that.

It's quite frustrating how it's impossible to filter out actual "cremates" from pictures that have them present as a background image, outline or otherwise in a non-functional way... Really wishing for a way to tag stuff as "present but not as an actual acting character", so that you can then filter a LOT of rather annoying tag explosions like bg pics, etc...

saphirel said:
It's quite frustrating how it's impossible to filter out actual "cremates" from pictures that have them present as a background image, outline or otherwise in a non-functional way... Really wishing for a way to tag stuff as "present but not as an actual acting character", so that you can then filter a LOT of rather annoying tag explosions like bg pics, etc...

saphirel said:
It's quite frustrating how it's impossible to filter out actual "cremates" from pictures that have them present as a background image, outline or otherwise in a non-functional way... Really wishing for a way to tag stuff as "present but not as an actual acting character", so that you can then filter a LOT of rather annoying tag explosions like bg pics, etc...

ratte said:
ambient_amogus

This is actually really good feedback. I will absolutely vote in favor of ambient_crewmate or similar getting tagged, categorized, and implying the related among_us tags.

Following discussion with other staff, I've made the following changes:

• There's precedent for text meme tags. No longer invalidating amogus, but having it imply meme.
• Introducing ambient_among_us as a parent tag to ambient_crewmate_(among_us) and the potentially-existing-but-as-of-yet-unknown-to-me ambient_impostor_(among_us).
• Introducing amogus_(stonetoss) as a tag for that specific version.
• amogus_(stonetoss) ambient_among_us: Ambient nazi amogi. post #2741098
• amogus_(stonetoss) -ambient_among_us: Focal nazi amogi. post #3521022

Edit: swapped out stonetoss for stonetoss_(parody), parodies of the artist do not justify inclusion of the artist.

Get rid of 100% of amogus tags. If they're worth keeping around, they're worth keeping around as Among_Us, not some senseless shortening (Literally just removes the N and a space???).

lafcadio said:

• Introducing ambient_among_us as a parent tag to ambient_crewmate_(among_us) and the potentially-existing-but-as-of-yet-unknown-to-me ambient_impostor_(among_us).

Do we need tags for particular characters that aren't the image focus? Better to just alias them, IMO.

furrin_gok said:
Get rid of 100% of amogus tags. If they're worth keeping around, they're worth keeping around as Among_Us, not some senseless shortening (Literally just removes the N and a space???).

There is unfortunately a precedent set by yolo, mommy_kink, daddy_kink, guess_I'll_die, and countless other meme tags.

watsit said:
Do we need tags for particular characters that aren't the image focus? Better to just alias them, IMO.

ambient_among_us unironically found quite a bit of support from the staff members presented with this BUR, and then there's the above reply on filtering out crewmates. Sneaking amogi into pictures is a noteworthy meme even past takes like among_us_eyes, and the presence/absence of ambient_among_us improves searching.

lafcadio said:
There is unfortunately a precedent set by yolo, mommy_kink, daddy_kink, guess_I'll_die, and countless other meme tags.

YOLO: You Only Live Once. A reasonable shortening of a very long phrase.
The other three are full phrases, which "sets the precedent" of using the full, proper phrase-term.

lafcadio said:
ambient_among_us unironically found quite a bit of support from the staff members presented with this BUR, and then there's the above reply on filtering out crewmates. Sneaking amogi into pictures is a noteworthy meme even past takes like among_us_eyes, and the presence/absence of ambient_among_us improves searching.

That seems silly, since there's a number of memes that have taken to being snuck into images (e.g. loss). If crewmates or the imposter are there, they're there, I don't see the point in making "ambient" tags for those particular characters being in the background. Should we have an ambient_waldo tag for Waldo being snuck into backgrounds? Or ambient_surprised_pikachu?

create implication amogus (93) -> meme (31820)
create implication among_us_eyes (23) -> among_us_pareidolia (9)
create implication among_us_pareidolia (9) -> among_us (723)

I can see those being useful, amongus eyes is a individual art meme on itself.
And amongus characters being subtly noticeable in some detail is also a individual meme on itself, imo.
---

create implication ambient_crewmate_(among_us) (9) -> ambient_among_us (9)
create implication ambient_crewmate_(among_us) (9) -> crewmate_(among_us) (351)
create implication ambient_impostor_(among_us) (0) -> ambient_among_us (9)
create implication ambient_impostor_(among_us) (0) -> impostor_(among_us) (185)

I would just alias all of these into one "ambient_amongus" or "among_us_in_ambient" or "background_amongus" to be honest. It all seems redundant. And unalias them if the need arise.
---

create implication ambient_among_us (9) -> among_us (723)
create implication amogus_(stonetoss) (3) -> stonetoss_(parody) (7)
create implication amogus_(stonetoss) (3) -> among_us (723)

Recognizable style of amogus, sounds good to me too.

watsit said:
That seems silly, since there's a number of memes that have taken to being snuck into images (e.g. loss). If crewmates or the imposter are there, they're there, I don't see the point in making "ambient" tags for those particular characters being in the background. Should we have an ambient_waldo tag for Waldo being snuck into backgrounds? Or ambient_surprised_pikachu?

Surprised_pikachu is a meme that's distinct from the species, and hiding it isn't significant enough to change how it's tagged.
Among_us does have a slight memetic status on its own, but "look, my character's a jelly bean spaceman!" is distinct from hiding amogi in images, the latter of which you will see commenters specifically calling out.

Forgive me for another fucky edit yet again, but I'm gonna split amogus and the more specific ambient_*_(amongus) tags into other BURs so that they might be approved/denied separately.

The bulk update request #3854 is pending approval.

create implication amogus (296) -> meme (57445)

Reason: Splitting up the BUR for reasons discussed above.

The bulk update request #3855 is pending approval.

create implication ambient_crewmate_(among_us) (293) -> ambient_among_us (1584)
create implication ambient_crewmate_(among_us) (293) -> crewmate_(among_us) (775)
create implication ambient_impostor_(among_us) (2) -> ambient_among_us (1584)
create implication ambient_impostor_(among_us) (2) -> impostor_(among_us) (240)

Reason: Splitting up the BUR for reasons discussed above.

lafcadio said:
Surprised_pikachu is a meme that's distinct from the species, and hiding it isn't significant enough to change how it's tagged.

crewmate_(among_us) is a character with no distinct species. I don't see how hiding it is significant enough to change how it's tagged (especially if ambient crewmate is going to implicate crewmate_(among_us) anyway). It's not a species that we'd handle like ambient_bird or ambient_fish.

Besides, hiding a crewmate doesn't inherently make it ambient. post #3625561 has a hidden crewmate that no one's realized to tag in three months, but it's not ambient/a minor background element, it's right in the eyes on a prominent character's face.

lafcadio said:
Among_us does have a slight memetic status on its own, but "look, my character's a jelly bean spaceman!" is distinct from hiding amogi in images, the latter of which you will see commenters specifically calling out.

As you can see with just about any meme. Hide Loss, hide Waldo, hide surprised pikachu, hide a JoJo reference, and watch commenters specifically call it out when they see it.

What's the difference between "ambient crewmate" and "ambient impostor"? Isn't the whole point that they're impossible to tell apart?

I think just ambient_among_us on its own would be sufficient to cover this phenomenon, and I don't want it to imply crewmate_(among_us) either because it would interfere with searches for actual crewmates. (Yes, I also think ambient_bird -> bird should be removed. Everyone complains about that implication.)

wat8548 said:
What's the difference between "ambient crewmate" and "ambient impostor"? Isn't the whole point that they're impossible to tell apart?

I think just ambient_among_us on its own would be sufficient to cover this phenomenon, and I don't want it to imply crewmate_(among_us) either because it would interfere with searches for actual crewmates. (Yes, I also think ambient_bird -> bird should be removed. Everyone complains about that implication.)

I mean, even one hidden in a corner can still have an open maw, making it an imposter, not a crewmate. Anything that you can't tell is an imposter from its appearance would be tagged crewmate instead, even if the artist says it's an imposter, I'd say.