BUR that creates:
imply age1_on_age2 -> age2
imply age1_on_age2 -> age_difference (when age1 ≠ age2, except if age1 can imply age2 (ie. teen_on_young))

second BUR just does this:
alias age2_on_age1 (just the reverse of every implying tag in the first BUR, unless self-referential, ie. young_on_young)

This has been a pet-peeve of mine for a long time, as someone who enjoys age_difference content and also does some tagging.

Note 1: This BUR is based on the assumption that all age_on_age tags use the older_on_younger version, with the younger_on_older versions aliased.

Note 2: adult is not a valid tag on its own, and has no gender/species agnostic aside from mature_(disambiguation) (along with young cub being more broad in age range) makes this BUR asymmetric. It not being a tag is annoying and seems unreasonable in this instance, although that is of minor importance in this BUR and is a separate discussion regardless.

Note 3: shota and loli appear to be similar to cub in that they apply to any underaged character as long as their apparent sex matches.

Note 4: I've prioritized order for young_on_x and cub_on_x (and omitted x_on_young and x_on_cub) because while the age may be ambiguous, they are parent tags and could be older.
(Exceptions for adult and teenager because those will be older or at least equal, respectively.)

Note 5: This kind of goes with Note 4, but I'm also using an age hierarchy for both aliases' names and implications of their reverse:

• adult
• teenager
• young (could also be below child, I have no preference but I already wrote the BUR this way)
• child
• shota (shota above loli to be consistent with the ordering of male/female and shota/loli above cub to be consistent with the ordering of human_on_anthro)
• loli
• cub
• baby

Those notes should explain why some tags are omitted

I'm probably overthinking this, but even if only half of this BUR is approved then I'd be happy.

magikarp said:
BUR that creates:
imply age1_on_age2 -> age2
imply age1_on_age2 -> age_difference (when age1 ≠ age2, except if age1 can imply age2 (ie. teen_on_young))

Although you have:

imply teenager_on_young -> age_difference
imply teenager_on_cub -> age_difference

Teenager and cub both imply young, making these young_on_young, so no age_difference.

watsit said:
Although you have:

imply teenager_on_young -> age_difference
imply teenager_on_cub -> age_difference

Teenager and cub both imply young, making these young_on_young, so no age_difference.

Good catch, I removed those entries. age_difference was mostly a tack-on and I had to resist tacking on other things I noticed along the way.

On note 3, shota and loli aren't just tack-ons, they get used only when the young male/female is sexually involved with the image. For example, a female child with their vagina showing gets tagged loli, while them fully dressed and not doing anything sexual would not get tagged loli. Otherwise, neither tag would exist since they would just be combo tags of young and male or female, and e6 tends to avoid combo tags.

Also, young is our base tag for all age categories. Loli & shota aren't age categories, they're gender categories for young characters; teen, child, baby, and toddler are our age categories so far, so ideally adult_on_X should also imply adult_on_young. Et cetera for the other implications. And why is anthro in that "age hierarchy", anthro is just a body type and is irrelevant to age entirely.

siral_exan said:
On note 3, shota and loli aren't just tack-ons, they get used only when the young male/female is sexually involved with the image. For example, a female child with their vagina showing gets tagged loli, while them fully dressed and not doing anything sexual would not get tagged loli. Otherwise, neither tag would exist since they would just be combo tags of young and male/female, and e6 tends to avoid combo tags.

Also, young is our base tag for all age categories. Loli & shota aren't age categories, they're gender categories; teen, prepubescent, child, baby, and toddler are our age categories so far, so ideally adult_on_X should also imply adult_on_young. Et cetera for the other implications.

I just mean that our tags are incomplete, if you put the purpose of shota, loli, cub, teenager, adult, etc. in cells of a grid with age and sex for its axes, you'd see that many of the cells are empty, and shota, loli, and cub aren't specific to a single cell (they cover both child and baby age ranges). Prepubescent isn't a tag, although that is what's used to specify the age for shota and loli on the wiki. Loli and shota feel like tack-ons because they cover a very specific intersection of tags.

Tags that cover a specific intersection of other tags (like short_stack (short, female, and curvy figure) and girly (male, but with a femme appearance)) are great tags for finding content, but they do not help people search for things that don't have a convenient and popular tag at their intersection (ie. there's no way to search big_balls small_penis without also adding on solo (which omits many images that would otherwise fit the criteria).

This site could fix that if they completely gutted the search system and replaced it with a per-character search, with the ability to specify tags per character or between characters instead of per image (ie. character1:female character1:slapping_character2 character2:male). It would replace the need for having hundreds of thousands of composite/relational/conditional tags, but obviously it's an impossibly large amount of data that needs to be created to do so.

Also I don't see what you're pointing out about note 3, you basically said the same thing I did. I'm not sure why you're explaining the young tag to me other than me missing 2 lines in a repetitive 100+ line BUR.

You do bring up a good point about the age-specific relational tags implying the non-specific ones (thankfully regex makes this pretty easy). I will add those 👍

UPDATED (also apologies for being defensive, I spent 3 hours reading the wiki to make sure my BUR was useful. Doesn't excuse me for being a dick, also I fixed the anthro thing, I meant to type cub there (probably a crossed wire from when I was search human_on_anthro to verify the word order in that tag).)

Hold on, just realized that I have some of the implies backwards in the third BUR. Okay that's fixed now.

magikarp said:

I just mean that our tags are incomplete, if you put the purpose of shota, loli, cub, teenager, adult, etc. in cells of a grid with age and sex for its axes, you'd see that many of the cells are empty, and shota, loli, and cub aren't specific to a single cell (they cover both child and baby age ranges). Prepubescent isn't a tag, although that is what's used to specify the age for shota and loli on the wiki. Loli and shota feel like tack-ons because they cover a very specific intersection of tags.

Tags that cover a specific intersection of other tags (like short_stack (short, female, and curvy figure) and girly (male, but with a femme appearance)) are great tags for finding content, but they do not help people search for things that don't have a convenient and popular tag at their intersection (ie. there's no way to search big_balls small_penis without also adding on solo (which omits many images that would otherwise fit the criteria).

This site could fix that if they completely gutted the search system and replaced it with a per-character search, with the ability to specify tags per character or between characters instead of per image (ie. character1:female character1:slapping_character2 character2:male). It would replace the need for having hundreds of thousands of composite/relational/conditional tags, but obviously it's an impossibly large amount of data that needs to be created to do so.

Also I don't see what you're pointing out about note 3, you basically said the same thing I did. I'm not sure why you're explaining the young tag to me other than me missing 2 lines in a repetitive 100+ line BUR.

You do bring up a good point about the age-specific relational tags implying the non-specific ones (thankfully regex makes this pretty easy). I will add those 👍

UPDATED (also apologies for being defensive, I spent 3 hours reading the wiki to make sure my BUR was useful. Doesn't excuse me for being a dick, also I fixed the anthro thing, I meant to type cub there (probably a crossed wire from when I was search human_on_anthro to verify the word order in that tag).)

Considering that you spent three hours writing this BUR, I have to ask a question: why did it take you 3 hours to write this all up? You're saying one thing yet the BUR, at least to me, reads another way, so I suggest taking some time to see if you can reorganize this BUR and further clarify any details you may have accidentally omitted, that way myself and possibly others can understand what you're suggesting and your thoughts on the matter.

siral_exan said:
Considering that you spent three hours writing this BUR, I have to ask a question: why did it take you 3 hours to write this all up? You're saying one thing yet the BUR, at least to me, reads another way, so I suggest taking some time to see if you can reorganize this BUR and further clarify any details you may have accidentally omitted, that way myself and possibly others can understand what you're suggesting and your thoughts on the matter.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, my notes are just notes, I think the BUR speaks for itself.

Again though, do give me feedback if there's something missing or incorrect but I feel like it's fine as it is.

magikarp said:
I'm not sure what you're trying to say, my notes are just notes, I think the BUR speaks for itself.

Again though, do give me feedback if there's something missing or incorrect but I feel like it's fine as it is.

The issue is this is an ill-organized BUR. For example, teenager_on_shota is not necessarily age_difference, teens can be shota too. The way you wrote this BUR makes it look like you assumed what these tags meant, but teenager_on_young doesn't need to imply young so long as it implies teenager, since teens count as young: it'll already imply young through proxy of implying teenager. It looks like you spent too much time writing the BUR trying to cover all angles and your notes, and not enough time proofreading and double-checking and avoiding redundancies. If you want, I can take some time to write up a more thorough BUR and send it to you, or if you're willing to spend more time on it to fix some missing/redundant stuff, otherwise I can't really help you without getting confused by what you wrote down.

siral_exan said:
The issue is this is an ill-organized BUR. For example, teenager_on_shota is not necessarily age_difference, teens can be shota too.

If you read the wiki for shota, it states "preadolescent", which is categorically not a teenager. The wiki page might need to be updated if this isn't correct, although gelbooru and danbooru agree with this verbatim.

tl;dr, they're mutually exclusive categories referring specifically to age, age_difference unambiguously applies.

siral_exan said:
but teenager_on_young doesn't need to imply young so long as it implies teenager

True, I can fix this if it's an issue, but that is moreso redundant than incorrect. I admit fault there.

siral_exan said:
The way you wrote this BUR makes it look like you assumed what these tags meant

Between the 150 lines of this BUR it becomes difficult to keep track of smaller details between overlapping categories. I will admit that you are right, I didn't spend very much time proofreading it, only amending it as I wrote it and I am lucky to have others interested enough to read it.

I could ramble about how I've had to parse through over 300 lines of script-generated tags and remove over half of them manually, but I'll spare you the details. I am honestly quite tired of the work that I've already done on it, and I'd happily accept help. (that said, I'll remove the redundancies you've specifically pointed out0. Updated.)

magikarp said:
If you read the wiki for shota, it states "preadolescent", which is categorically not a teenager. The wiki page might need to be updated if this isn't correct, although gelbooru and danbooru agree with this verbatim.

Well, i apologize for cherry-picking that out of the bunch of things I've noticed, apparently I'm gonna have to ask the admin who edited the wiki whether that change was intentional or not since it now leaves a hole in people's blacklists. If teens don't count as loli or shota now, people can't thoroughly avoid young sexualized content by just blacklisting those tags... this is already an issue due to our lack of intersex tags for such characters, but this just makes it worse (and is why I advocate just blacklisting young -rating:s until we patch up the intersex problem).

At this point, I can't even think about this anymore. I'll trust that your suggestion is right, but I was in the process of writing a differently-structured BUR to accomplish what you're suggesting. Tell me if you want me to send it to you.

siral_exan said:
Well, i apologize for cherry-picking that out of the bunch of things I've noticed, apparently I'm gonna have to ask the admin who edited the wiki whether that change was intentional or not since it now leaves a hole in people's blacklists. If teens don't count as loli or shota now, people can't thoroughly avoid young sexualized content by just blacklisting those tags... this is already an issue due to our lack of intersex tags for such characters, but this just makes it worse (and is why I advocate just blacklisting young -rating:s until we patch up the intersex problem).

At this point, I can't even think about this anymore. I'll trust that your suggestion is right, but I was in the process of writing a differently-structured BUR to accomplish what you're suggesting. Tell me if you want me to send it to you.

Fire away, my inbox is open.

A (probably non-trivial) feature that would easily fix the blacklist issue would be having separate groups for blacklists, ie. (young -rating:s) (gore) (other_stuff) I dunno how it would affect search performance, so the might have to limit the blacklist if the overhead is significant. Regardless, feature requests are for a different category.

magikarp said:
Fire away, my inbox is open.

A (probably non-trivial) feature that would easily fix the blacklist issue would be having separate groups for blacklists, ie. (young -rating:s) (gore) (other_stuff) I dunno how it would affect search performance, so the might have to limit the blacklist if the overhead is significant. Regardless, feature requests are for a different category.

that's just it, unless i'm interpreting you wrong that is how our blacklist works. blacklisting
young -rating:s gore et_cetera
would blacklist young that isn't rated safe, and gore, and et cetera so long as each is on it's on line. the issue is people latch onto loli and shota as the tags to blacklist when trying to avoid "pedophile" content, or cub or child or whatnot, when all those tags have restrictions for when they apply. young -rating:s achieves their goal unless it's misrated, with the only catch being it'll also catch any post not featuring kids in sexual situations, but where they're not involved and are just in the image. it'll blacklist two dudes having sex in the bushes while a random child is in the image, because that would be tagged young rating:e and not young rating:s... if we fix up loli and shota by creating five more tags for the intersex genders & ambiguous_gender, then we solve their problem decently well so long as those tags are all used.

basically, this is a headache that i've been trying to solve by thinking up names for such tags, and since preadolescent refers to a specific age group this just creates another issue that needs addressing. as for my write-up for the BUR, i have it on my PC but i'm going to bed right now, i can show you it tomorrow though.

siral_exan said:
that's just it, unless i'm interpreting you wrong that is how our blacklist works. blacklisting
young -rating:s gore et_cetera
would blacklist young that isn't rated safe, and gore, and et cetera so long as each is on it's on line. the issue is people latch onto loli and shota as the tags to blacklist when trying to avoid "pedophile" content, or cub or child or whatnot, when all those tags have restrictions for when they apply. young -rating:s achieves their goal unless it's misrated, with the only catch being it'll also catch any post not featuring kids in sexual situations, but where they're not involved and are just in the image. it'll blacklist two dudes having sex in the bushes while a random child is in the image, because that would be tagged young rating:e and not young rating:s... if we fix up loli and shota by creating five more tags for the intersex genders & ambiguous_gender, then we solve their problem decently well so long as those tags are all used.

basically, this is a headache that i've been trying to solve by thinking up names for such tags, and since preadolescent refers to a specific age group this just creates another issue that needs addressing. as for my write-up for the BUR, i have it on my PC but i'm going to bed right now, i can show you it tomorrow though.

Oh neat, the blacklist already functions the way I idealized it, shame that I only have one thing blacklisted haha. This seems like a non issue as this is just a matter of people blacklisting tags when they see a post they don't like. Anyways, I digress.

To my knowledge, there's no requirement for a BUR to be "complete" and I've made an obvious effort to make it comprehensive and effective. Are there other considerations preventing my BUR from being pushed aside from further proofreading and staff approval?

sorry for the late response, i received the admin's answer only a couple days before i got sick and stuck in bed...

they had said that they only edited it to undo someone else's edit, and that they don't have any input on it. i'm gonna go ahead and reword loli and shota now to not be so specific on age, since that's what it was intended for originally and it wasn't meant to be changed to 9-12 years old. sorry for any headache this causes.

siral_exan said:
sorry for the late response, i received the admin's answer only a couple days before i got sick and stuck in bed...

they had said that they only edited it to undo someone else's edit, and that they don't have any input on it. i'm gonna go ahead and reword loli and shota now to not be so specific on age, since that's what it was intended for originally and it wasn't meant to be changed to 9-12 years old. sorry for any headache this causes.

Regardless, I am still waiting for an update on whether my BUR is approved or not.

magikarp said:
Regardless, I am still waiting for an update on whether my BUR is approved or not.

I don't know if you realised this, but you haven't actually created a BUR yet. You are unlikely to receive much in the way of feedback before you do.

wat8548 said:
I don't know if you realised this, but you haven't actually created a BUR yet. You are unlikely to receive much in the way of feedback before you do.

I am aware, although BURs have 50 tag limits, and this request is more than 50, so adding/removing tags would mean juggling tags between BURs.

Also it's trivial to just copy paste this into a form, but if I need to make a BUR to get feedback on it then I will.

magikarp said:
I am aware, although BURs have 50 tag limits, and this request is more than 50, so adding/removing tags would mean juggling tags between BURs.

Also it's trivial to just copy paste this into a form, but if I need to make a BUR to get feedback on it then I will.

Simple, make multiple BURs, and list them in one single response withing this forum by using sections.

Btw, isn't the BUR limit 25 requests?

m3g4p0n1 said:
Simple, make multiple BURs, and list them in one single response withing this forum by using sections.

BUR list

BUR 1 (Unaliasing and unimplying tags) | (Approved or Pending)

/[BUR:xxxx]

BUR 2 (re-aliasing tags and re-implying tags) | (Approved or pending)

/[BUR:xxxx]

Btw, isn't the BUR limit 25 requests?

Hmm, hold on. How do you do that? When you create a BUR it makes a new thread/post automatically.
Never mind I figured it out~

Yeah, I was told 25 earlier when I asked.