Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The bulk update request #10594 is pending approval.
create implication permanent_endosoma (40) -> long_term_endosoma (21)
create implication permanent_bondage (352) -> long_term_bondage (128)
Reason: The limits between "long term" and "permanent" are blurry, but it feels like "forever" should count as a "long time" for tagging purposes. Only bondage and endosoma have two tags with each term.
These seem too TWYK, as a single image can't show permanence, and should probably be aliased away. Text/dialog is considered external information, as it may or may not be truthful or hyperbolic.
watsit said:
These seem too TWYK, as a single image can't show permanence, and should probably be aliased away. Text/dialog is considered external information, as it may or may not be truthful or hyperbolic.
Yeah, these should be aliases, not implications.
Oh yeah 100%. It being a long time can be shown via sequence/comic, but permanent is a bit harder to quantify
The bulk update request #10599 is pending approval.
create alias permanent_endosoma (40) -> long_term_endosoma (21)
create alias permanent_bondage (352) -> long_term_bondage (128)
Reason: Apparently it should be an alias, not an implication.
watsit said:
These seem too TWYK, as a single image can't show permanence, and should probably be aliased away. Text/dialog is considered external information, as it may or may not be truthful or hyperbolic.
What about things like timers or other objective time indications? Must there be depictions of elapsed time for it to count as "long term", or would it still count if a comic ends with "now you're locked up, see you in ten years"? Even if dialogue might not be truthful, the *idea* of permanency might be enough for people who want to blacklist it, hence the need to tag it accurately.
I'm just trying to understand how everything works. The e6 tagging system is very accurate, but that's part of what makes it confusing.
sandentwinks said:
What about things like timers or other objective time indications? Must there be depictions of elapsed time for it to count as "long term", or would it still count if a comic ends with "now you're locked up, see you in ten years"?
Dialogue is not always so reliable since peeps can lie (I don't believe this is the main reason, we have tags which rely on a visual/textual mix to get tagged, though visual always takes priority for them). But something being long term can be shown by change of scenery, maybe the characters getting older, anything that unambiguously depicts time having passed.
Even if dialogue might not be truthful, the *idea* of permanency might be enough for people who want to blacklist it, hence the need to tag it accurately.
Let's make an analogy. If a character says "i'm gonna chew you up and swallow you" would that make the post hard vore? Despite no occurrences of it happening? What about when people use metaphors and the like?
I'm just trying to understand how everything works. The e6 tagging system is very accurate, but that's part of what makes it confusing.
Yeah, same here
snpthecat said:
Dialogue is not always so reliable since peeps can lie (I don't believe this is the main reason, we have tags which rely on a visual/textual mix to get tagged, though visual always takes priority for them).
More accurately, characters can simply be wrong. A character can say the other character will be locked up for a long time or forever, and fully mean it, but once they leave, the other character can escape or get broken out after only a couple minutes.
Another issue with dialog is it's transient. Even if taken as TWYS, it would only apply to the page it's in, so in a multi-page sequence, someone can be locked up in one page, have dialog stating it's long-term/forever in the next page, and there be another page showing them still locked up. Each page is tagged on its own, so the relevant tag would only apply to the one middle page and not the first or third page since the dialog wouldn't be in them, despite being locked up in all three.
What about implied_permanent + bondage, rather than permanent_bondage? If I understood right, "permanent_*" tags shouldn't even be used, if there's no way to prove it. Or perhaps they could all be aliased/renamed to "implied_permanent_*". I know "permanent" can't be seen and therefore difficult to TWYS, but I still would like there to be a tag for these kinds of scenarios.
watsit said:
More accurately, characters can simply be wrong. A character can say the other character will be locked up for a long time or forever, and fully mean it, but once they leave, the other character can escape or get broken out after only a couple minutes.
Does that apply to single-image posts? Those are what I see most.
Or perhaps this could do with the "tightness" of the situation? A single locked collar can be broken out of, but the permanent_* stuff I'm more interested in features characters being locked in unrealistically break-proof contraptions, and at some point we have to concede there's no "breaking out after a couple minutes" out of solid steel walls. https://e621.net/posts/3610607
implied_*sandentwinks said:
What about implied_permanent + bondage, rather than permanent_bondage?
tags still require some visual element to indicate the thing, it doesn't get around the TWYS rule. A number of implied_* tags have been aliased away for not meeting TWYS standards, and more probably could be if pointed out.
sandentwinks said:
Or perhaps this could do with the "tightness" of the situation? A single locked collar can be broken out of, but the permanent_* stuff I'm more interested in features characters being locked in unrealistically break-proof contraptions, and at some point we have to concede there's no "breaking out after a couple minutes" out of solid steel walls. https://e621.net/posts/3610607
That would be subjective, and given that stuff here is fiction, there's really no point where we can say a character can never get out.
