The tag implication #68181 permanent_endosoma -> endosoma is pending approval.

Reason: The names should be reason enough

Not a fan of permanent_* tags since you usually can't tell visually that something is permanent, and is just an assumption or assertion. Note that dialog doesn't usually count as it's considered external information; characters and narration can be wrong, and it would get confusing when the same character is drawn again outside of that endosoma situation (it can't be permanent if they're out again).

This is better as an alias, IMO.

watsit said:
Not a fan of permanent_* tags since you usually can't tell visually that something is permanent, and is just an assumption or assertion. Note that dialog doesn't usually count as it's considered external information; characters and narration can be wrong, and it would get confusing when the same character is drawn again outside of that endosoma situation (it can't be permanent if they're out again).

This is better as an alias, IMO.

On the other hand, these are some of the only posts that actually have any reason in the post itself at all to be tagged endosoma. It's an extremely mistagged concept, very rarely TWYS (safe_vore is bad enough, and endosoma adds that they stay in there for a while, rarely really shown). If dialogue doesn't count for endosoma then pretty much the only thing that would count is a time passing sequence, invalidating nearly the entire tag.

scth said:
On the other hand, these are some of the only posts that actually have any reason in the post itself at all to be tagged endosoma. It's an extremely mistagged concept, very rarely TWYS (safe_vore is bad enough, and endosoma adds that they stay in there for a while, rarely really shown). If dialogue doesn't count for endosoma then pretty much the only thing that would count is a time passing sequence, invalidating nearly the entire tag.

From reading the wiki, it seems the primary difference between vore and endosoma is similar to the difference between peeing and watersports. If the character being vored is taking pleasure in it, sexual or otherwise, it would count. Yes, it does seem to be often misused on plain old vore images, much like how watersports is often misused when characters are simply peeing, because someone's trying to say it's a fetish for the viewer rather than something being fetishized within the image.