Topic: Unimply full tour from safe vore.

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

EndosomaCop

Member

rupikonna said:
First two depict safe vore (first one has one round of safe vore, and one round of fatal vore), third one does not depict full tour at all.

The tags concern prey fate, don't they? If they are safe for the first half a sequence but are dying in the second half, it usually is seen as fatal vore when it isn't a full tour. Making them do a second not so safe tour isnt much different from that especially if it's the pred immediately doing it.

Cow of Fire

Member

endosomacop said:
The tags concern prey fate, don't they? If they are safe for the first half a sequence but are dying in the second half, it usually is seen as fatal vore when it isn't a full tour. Making them do a second not so safe tour isn't much different from that especially if it's the pred immediately doing it.

Then it is no longer full_tour. A tour is…as an example, when an American YouTuber goes across the country, letting their fans see them. Or when a German band comes to America, letting their fans see them. Or when you go onto an island, and a tour guide points out the significant locations like the lighthouse that was once used as speakeasy. Or when your annoying but cheerful friend drags you into a museum and points out where the mistakes are in the displays, telling you that the cigarette lighter that the wax figure is holding is wrong because that specific lighter was invented two months after what the display is representing.
Tours do not end in death.

LendriMujina

Member

Even if there's no examples at the moment (or if there are I'm really not willing to dig deeper), I vote to unimply because how it could happen is far from inconceivable.

If the person comes out on the other side alive, but with horrific acid burns or bite wounds or... other byproducts of digestion... that is not safe. Not fatal, still full tour, but not safe by any means.

SNPtheCat

Member

lendrimujina said:
Even if there's no examples at the moment (or if there are I'm really not willing to dig deeper), I vote to unimply because how it could happen is far from inconceivable.

If the person comes out on the other side alive, but with horrific acid burns or bite wounds or... other byproducts of digestion... that is not safe. Not fatal, still full tour, but not safe by any means.

It's a matter of how we define full_tour, more than anything

SNPtheCat

Member

rupikonna said:
First two depict safe vore (first one has one round of safe vore, and one round of fatal vore), third one does not depict full tour at all.

The second post does bring up the question of how full_tour can be used. Since the act of vore can be spread out over a couple of pages, and general tags are independent of other posts in the pool. So you can't tag it on any posts, which is definitely not what we want.

Also should we have a full_tour -esque tag where the prey does not necessarily have to be unharmed? Maybe we could use full_tour as its name, and what we consider as full_tour now could be moved over to osha_tour

Updated

LendriMujina

Member

regsmutt said:
The first part IS safe_vore. Safe and fatal vore can exist in the same work. There are very few tags that are mutually exclusive.

That's not what is being argued.

If someone is being full toured to death, it doesn't matter if someone ELSE is being full toured safely; it still shows full tour isn't always safe.

(...I think. I have to admit I refuse to actually look at the post. That kind of thing deeply disturbs me to see and vore as a whole was like the first thing I blacklisted.)

regsmutt

Member

lendrimujina said:
That's not what is being argued.

If someone is being full toured to death, it doesn't matter if someone ELSE is being full toured safely; it still shows full tour isn't always safe.

(...I think. I have to admit I refuse to actually look at the post. That kind of thing deeply disturbs me to see and vore as a whole was like the first thing I blacklisted.)

It is what is being argued. 'Full tour' here means that the character is traveling through the digestive tract unharmed. A character being digested is not full tour.

The example given shows one character traveling through a digestive tract unharmed. A different character is then digested and not leaving the digestive tract. The argument is that the presence of the later scene makes the earlier sequence not taggable as safe vore.

EndosomaCop

Member

regsmutt said:
The first part IS safe_vore. Safe and fatal vore can exist in the same work. There are very few tags that are mutually exclusive.

I struggle to see how Safe_Vore and Fatal_Vore are not one of those few mutually exclusive cases. Someone searching for fatal or safe is unlikely to want to see the other and vore already exists for the general "anything goes" tag. The presence of fatal invalidates the safe tag as it depicts fatal harm dealt to someone while safe is used for works without that theme.

LendriMujina

Member

endosomacop said:
I struggle to see how Safe_Vore and Fatal_Vore are not one of those few mutually exclusive cases. Someone searching for fatal or safe is unlikely to want to see the other and vore already exists for the general "anything goes" tag. The presence of fatal invalidates the safe tag as it depicts fatal harm dealt to someone while safe is used for works without that theme.

The tag means "this event is occurring within the work", not "this event describes the entire work".

I think you're just going to have to put "death" on your blacklist. Most other people do.

(I do still strongly think the unimplication should happen, but that's out of my hands.)

dba afish

Member

endosomacop said:
I struggle to see how Safe_Vore and Fatal_Vore are not one of those few mutually exclusive cases. Someone searching for fatal or safe is unlikely to want to see the other and vore already exists for the general "anything goes" tag. The presence of fatal invalidates the safe tag as it depicts fatal harm dealt to someone while safe is used for works without that theme.

just because one action is fatal dosn't mean another isn't, I don't see what's so hard about this to understand. there can be instances of safe and fatal vore in the same post, just like there can be instances of masturbation and sex in the same post. they're tagging individual actions, not the post as a whole.

EndosomaCop

Member

dba_afish said:
just because one action is fatal dosn't mean another isn't, I don't see what's so hard about this to understand. there can be instances of safe and fatal vore in the same post, just like there can be instances of masturbation and sex in the same post. they're tagging individual actions, not the post as a whole.

Even then, it is also possible for the prey to survive a full tour, but have been harmed. This was brought up earlier.

dba afish

Member

endosomacop said:
Even then, it is also possible for the prey to survive a full tour, but have been harmed. This was brought up earlier.

well, they could also be transformed which might not be considered safe, depending on who you ask.

I'm not saying that I disagree with the premise that the tag shouldn't imply safe vore, I'm just saying that the example posts you cited don't seem to contradict the safe_vore tag.

EndosomaCop

Member

dba_afish said:
well, they could also be transformed which might not be considered safe, depending on who you ask.

I'm not saying that I disagree with the premise that the tag shouldn't imply safe vore, I'm just saying that the example posts you cited don't seem to contradict the safe_vore tag.

It occurs to me that whether or not partial_digestion is considered safe_vore is what is being asked in that case.

Here are examples of such:
https://e621.net/posts/4985592?q=full_tour+devourer_%28razor_koopa%29
https://e621.net/posts/4500748?q=partial_digestion
And another less related seeming example where regurgitation occurs but the safe tag is not applied:
https://e621.net/posts/5290987?q=partial_digestion

Updated

regsmutt

Member

endosomacop said:
It occurs to me that whether or not partial_digestion is considered safe_vore is what is being asked in that case.

Here are examples of such:
https://e621.net/posts/4985592?q=full_tour+devourer_%28razor_koopa%29
https://e621.net/posts/4500748?q=partial_digestion
And another less related seeming example where regurgitation occurs but the safe tag is not applied:
https://e621.net/posts/5290987?q=partial_digestion

That first example shouldn't be tagged full_tour OR safe_vore. There's no 'full tour' and no way to tell in this one image if it's safe or not.
The second example is borderline. It's hard to tell how digested the character is because it's not colored and the character in question has a bald/skinless face by default. Now just for the sake of argument let's assume the dog had skin, eyelids, and lips when first eaten. I think that would be a valid case of full_tour not being safe_vore, but it's an edge case and I don't think everyone would agree with that. I can see reasonable disagreement there.
The last one is also borderline, but I'd err more on the side of 'safe' since the digestion doesn't seem to have done any harm.

LendriMujina

Member

As I said before, it doesn't matter if there's currently no extant examples. Unsafe full tour CAN be thought of and drawn, even if nobody's done it yet. And with the existence of "borderline" ones? Wouldn't take a lot of effort to step over that line. Therefore, safety shouldn't be implied.

I'd draw it myself to make a point, but I wouldn't be able to stomach doing so.