DB WORKSHOP: Tag discussion

@Archonix  
Thank you, Arch.

@Archonix  
After being given a day to think things through, I will only point out this: Tags should be informative, not inflammatory. If the tag name can be taken as an insult, someone will do so, and that will create conflict that could have been avoided.

@Background Pony #90AA  
A good number of the tags you pointed out are there so that people can avoid conflict being made by someone trying to stir up trouble though…

@OneOverTwo  
That doesn’t justify the tag itself being insulting. Rule 0 is a good rule. It should be followed, even in tag name choices.

@Background Pony #90AA  
What the heck should the tags be instead then?

@OneOverTwo  
/shrug Drama Bait seems sufficient, if we’re being honest. But maybe just Duck Post, or hell, Qwark. XD The metadata can alias the old tag, and then everyone’s block list stays the same.

@Background Pony #90AA  
I don’t know, I think one time I hid an artist tag & when the artist’s tag changed they were no longer blocked even though the old tag still aliased to the new tag. I might be remembering that wrong though…

@OneOverTwo  
I suppose I am making assumptions about the back end of things. But if the intent of rule zero is being broken with a tag, that tag really needs to be looked at.

It was suggested by Solitude that i ask this here instead of an own thread, so this is simply an re-post.
 
Tag clarification ‘Scat’
 
Hello there, i know i am might bringing up a sore topic here, its not my intention to kick up a shit storm (which i thought would be a funny analogy given the topic) so please keep it civil.
 
I am recognizing quite a few diaper related pictures tagged with ’scat’ lately, since i have this tag spoilered this bothers me a bit.  
I was always under the impression that scat would be the open display of feces in a fetish sense.  
This might be a rather specific personal problem but messy diapers (unless they are like bursting, starting to spill or something) i can tolerate and in some specific rare cases even like, but open feces always trigger the ’ewww’ reaction, therefore i was glad that the scat tag was used only for the later before.
 
So my question is, is this intentional or is someone just acting a bit overzealous with the scat tag ?  
I think the already existing ’messy diaper’ tag would be sufficient for pictures like this because in my personal definition book that does not count as something people would look for if they search for this tag and likewise i don’t like having to go trough a mine field of spoilered pictures just to find out which one is real and which one isn’t, that kinda defies the point of ’spoilering’ the tag in the first place.
 
I would also like to know how others perceive this issue, am i having a point with the whole thing or will i step on someones feet by removing that tag from future images that won’t fit into my definition ?

@Squeezy Flash  
I won’t be much help since I have both tags filtered but I’m also under the impression that scat would be the open display of feces in a fetish sense. Could be that someone simply misunderstands the tag’s purpose. Does the tag have a description? Those tend to be clear on the matter.

@Squeezy Flash  
Scat:Applies to any picture that involves feces in a fetishistic sense.
 
It doesn’t have to be visible, just involved.

@Ciaran
 
Well that’s what the current specification says but that is also why i am asking for clarification because if Scat will be considered anything involving feces then the board would need 2 more tags, specifying this further because (at least for me) there is a significant difference between feces covered behind a diaper and the other kind.
 
Not long ago there was the ‘scat’ and the ‘messy diaper’ tag and scat seemed to be considered anything involving open, flying or whatever.. not covered feces, which was fine by me because it was an easy way to filter content i didn’t want to see, without bothering someone who wanted to, now those seem to have merged, fortunate or unfortunate (however you wanna take it) my ‘eww tolerance’ in that regard did not change.  
So my question is, can’t it just be changed back to the way it seemed to be interpreted before ?

@Squeezy Flash  
So you want to see messy diapers but you don’t want to see actual feces?
 
There isn’t a need for additional tags, you could just create a complex filter to hide “scat AND -messy diaper”. That way scat will be hidden, but not if messy diaper is also on the image.

@Ciaran
 
Thanks, i never realized that there was a box for complex filters, this might not be the perfect solution but its definitely a solution i can improve by further editing the filter if necessary.

I noticed an issue with greentext today. Most of the time it’s used for a greentext story, which is what I would expect (example >>1205042), but it’s also sometimes used for a picture that has green text (example >>1176422). While I understand why people would tag that way, I personally want to hide the stories and not the art that might just be captioned or have speech bubbles done in greentext style, and I imagine other people feel the same.
 
I suggest stories get to continue using the greentext tag as it’s the more established use and the other uses get something along the lines of “Greentext-style caption”, “Greentext dialogue”, etc.

@expatriate.  
Complex filter: (greentext,text)

A valid idea in theory, but the current state of text makes it pretty ineffective. I guess that’s what I should be complaining about.

@expatriate.  
Then simply tag the images you come across that need tagging. That’s ideally what everyone should do.

In Stranger Than Fan Fiction, the Alicorn depicted here is pretty clearly Nightmare Moon; should images with that design be tagged as such?

Does anyone know what sinfully sexy is about? I can’t find any connecting factor.

@saby  
Only the people using the tag know.  
At least, one would assume they know.
 
Personally, I’ve thought that tag’s just begging for a nukin’ ever since I first heard of it.

@saby  

 
Looks like an opinion based tag. It is so sexy, it is a sin. Kinda like a comparative phrase or superlative.

@Mad Black  
It is the normal 10/10 sexy, but turned up to 11/10.

With apologies to Spike fans… I think the tag Mane Seven has had it’s meaning muddied up enough with the additions of Glimmer and Shimmer as to be kind of pointless. It might be best to remove it to avoid confusion.

@Background Pony #90AA  
Err I did a quick check for “mane seven, sg,-spike” and “mane seven,sunset shimmer,-spike” and found ZERO misuses. What are you basing this claim on?