Viewing last 25 versions of post by Zeb in topic Differentiating vore with sexual fetishistic intent versus a SFW one

"[@Badumsquish":](/tagging/differentiating-vore-with-sexual-fetishistic-intent-versus-a-sfw-one/post/2845637#post_2845637
We) already do have images tagged "vore" as safe. As far as I k 
[Snow, the tag doesn't bumip] up the rat 
Ning jautomatically.

I think what cheeze'doodle meant was that picturles that actually _do_ contapin a fetish of sorts must be at least suggestive.
The issue
 
is our Vore tag is used for both fetish and non-fetish instances. So it sits on both sites.


" 
[@cheezedoodle":](/tagging/differentiating-vore-with-sexual-fetishistic-intent-versus-a-sfw-one/post/2845619#post_2845619
)  
"Eaten alive" could work. Like you said, as long as we give it a strict "NOT for the fetish." description, and do cleanup on it and the vore tags. Might be a good idea.


 
What do others think?

"@Badumsquish":/tagging/differentiating-vore-with-sexual-fetishistic-intent-versus-a-sfw-one/post/2845637#post_2845637
We already do have images tagged "vore" as safe. As far as I know, the tag doesn't bump up the rating automatically.

I think what cheezedoodle meant was that pictures that actually _do_ contain a fetish of sorts must be at least suggestive.
The issue is our Vore tag is used for both fetish and non-fetish instances. So it sits on both sites.


"@cheezedoodle":/tagging/differentiating-vore-with-sexual-fetishistic-intent-versus-a-sfw-one/post/2845619#post_2845619
"Eaten alive" could work. Like you said, as long as we give it a strict "NOT for the fetish." description, and do cleanup on it and the vore tags. Might be a good idea.

What do others think?