The tag implication #67060 faggot_pride_colors -> invalid_tag has been rejected.

Reason: The word itself is already an invalid tag, so theres really no need for this one.

EDIT: The tag implication faggot_pride_colors -> invalid_tag (forum #443652) has been rejected by @furrypickle.

I assume you meant alias.

It is, shockingly, tagged correctly on this image
post #4827426

The colors of the bow are accurate to the first flag listed here https://lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/F*ggot
So it has a valid use. However, this use might be too obscure (there are a LOT of pride colors/flags- is it worth having one-post tags for a lot of the obscure ones?) and the name might invite bad behavior. Also, would pride_colors be a better target for the alias?

regsmutt said:
It is, shockingly, tagged correctly on this image
post #4827426

The colors of the bow are accurate to the first flag listed here https://lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/F*ggot
So it has a valid use. However, this use might be too obscure (there are a LOT of pride colors/flags- is it worth having one-post tags for a lot of the obscure ones?) and the name might invite bad behavior. Also, would pride_colors be a better target for the alias?

I see that lone image has several created and isolated tags by itself
You could effectively remove the use of faggot_pride_colors, and any others on that image, just by removing the offending tags from it
The tags would technically still exist but being one of a million unused tags ultimately accomplishes the same goal (except for Janitors who probably have to scrub dead tags from the server)

nin10dope said:
I see that lone image

I see that lone image has several created and isolated tags by itself
You could effectively remove the use of faggot_pride_colors, and any others on that image, just by removing the offending tags from it
The tags would technically still exist but being one of a million unused tags ultimately accomplishes the same goal (except for Janitors who probably have to scrub dead tags from the server)

I don't think single-use tags are inherently bad or useless, and they aren't unprecedented either. I personally think identity/pride colors are one of the more okay cases of single/low use tags compared to like, subspecies and extremely-specific sex positions. But it's not something I feel strongly about beyond 'probably wait to get a few more opinions before deleting those tags.'

nin10dope said:
(except for Janitors who probably have to scrub dead tags from the server)

Tags exist forever, no one can delete them

donovan_dmc said:
Tags exist forever, no one can delete them

Thanks, didn't know that

regsmutt said:
I don't think single-use tags are inherently bad or useless, and they aren't unprecedented either. I personally think identity/pride colors are one of the more okay cases of single/low use tags compared to like, subspecies and extremely-specific sex positions. But it's not something I feel strongly about beyond 'probably wait to get a few more opinions before deleting those tags.'

I agree on single-use, I was just throwing that concept out there for people

In any case, this implication should be rejected

The tag implication faggot_pride_colors -> invalid_tag (forum #443652) has been rejected by @furrypickle.