Schorl Tourmaline
"[@Ciaran":](/forums/tagging/topics/official-fall-of-equestria-tag?post_id=5025804#post_5025804
)
I did report the image. It still has the tag. You know this.
I'm not trying to be annoying here, and you're right, it does have a TV Tropes page. Now look at that page and see how the only thing that lines up with what it says, and"[this image":](/images/2544922) is that they both involve bondage. Does that mean all bondage images are, by default, Fall of Equestria images? Can I make something completely unrelated to the setting, and call it "Fall of Equestria"? At the moment, the answers to both seem to be yes.
I hate to harp on this, but even you stated that you spoke to the artist, and to you they didn't even know what a "Fall of Equestria" was, let alone had the ability to accurately say that this image was coherent to its themes. I, on the other hand, could define every way that this image shouldn't have that tag, and indeed will.
1. Despite the artist saying that it is a "fall of Equestria" image, the fact remains that the image was originally a YCH image with no prior connection to the setting before the commissioner wanted to slap the "Fall of Equestria" name to it for no reason. The image, in it's first incarnation, was at least 80% completed without the artist ever hearing of the setting, the only addition was the suspended character, who could have been (and probably has been) any type of furry OC added in determined on who wanted to pay the artist to finish the image.
2. Fall of Equestria does not feature Sergals, as it is purely an MLP setting that only uses MLP characters, aside from the Caribou, which was still an idea inspired by a comment Faust once made about a suggested species for the show.
3. Even ignoring that, the Sergal who was created as to always be part of the finished project, no matter who purchased the commission, is a female, and is not herself enslaved. The point of the setting is that all females are enslaved (or at the very least, the Sergal in this image would be, since she is clearly in a public area), and that enslavement is portrayed by a very specific design of collar around the neck, which can be seen in nearly every FoE image, fanwork or otherwise.
4. Fuasticorn is not a part of the setting, and would not ever be part of the setting, as it is an improper use of an OC by the standards of the creators of the setting.
5. Ignoring that, Fausticorn is not "decorated" as a slave in the setting would be. She doesn't wear the specific collar design, because the artist didn't know enough about the setting to know of the dress code, nor does the wing binder fit the setting, as females in the setting have their wings plucked of all feathers, and placed in very specific, confining wing binders that can be seen in any applicable FoE artwork, official or not. Again, the binder is like this because the artist didn't know enough about the setting to know the difference, nor did the commissioner give enough details to make it look right. The only thing in the image that could be considered "correct" about Fausticorn's appearance is the broken horn, but unless you are implying that all broken horn images are Fall of Equestria, that is not a defining factor.
6. As trite as it may be, the image has nothing on it indicating that it would be a fall of equestria image, and would be unrecognizable as such by any casual viewer who might have some knowledge of the setting. It is, for any who would look on it without being told "this is supposed to be a fall of Equestria image", just a random piece of furry bondage art. If site rules dictate that an image must be tagged as it appears, no one would ever tag this image as "Fall of Equestria" based on sight alone, cause it doesn't have anything that would define it as such, because it was not made at any point with the setting in mind by the artist, for reasons listed above. It is a generic, if well drawn, piece of bondage art, because that is what it was made to be. The fact that it IS generic facilitates its original YCH nature.
Again, I wouldn't even be here petitioning for a new tag if a disregard for the rules didn't make the old tag irrelevant. So long as this misrepresentation of the setting is allowed to have the tag, simply because someone who knows nothing about the setting, and never drew this piece of art with the setting in mind, says that its supposed to be for the setting, then the tag has no meaning, and literally everything is Fall of Equestria, so long as an artist says so.
Addendum: Also, and I had to confirm this, that TV Tropes page was created by, and edited by, members of the FoE community that I've personally worked with and were part of the Fall of Equestria project at one point or another. Even in your example, the definition of what makes something "Fall of Equestria" has solely been in the hands of its creators. If you don't believe me, I could invite one of the people who worked on that page here to confirm it.
I did report the image. It still has the tag. You know this.
I'm not trying to be annoying here, and you're right, it does have a TV Tropes page. Now look at that page and see how the only thing that lines up with what it says, and
I hate to harp on this, but even you stated that you spoke to the artist, and to you they didn't even know what a "Fall of Equestria" was, let alone had the ability to accurately say that this image was coherent to its themes. I, on the other hand, could define every way that this image shouldn't have that tag, and indeed will.
1. Despite the artist saying that it is a "fall of Equestria" image, the fact remains that the image was originally a YCH image with no prior connection to the setting before the commissioner wanted to slap the "Fall of Equestria" name to it for no reason. The image, in it's first incarnation, was at least 80% completed without the artist ever hearing of the setting, the only addition was the suspended character, who could have been (and probably has been) any type of furry OC added in determined on who wanted to pay the artist to finish the image.
2. Fall of Equestria does not feature Sergals, as it is purely an MLP setting that only uses MLP characters, aside from the Caribou, which was still an idea inspired by a comment Faust once made about a suggested species for the show.
3. Even ignoring that, the Sergal who was created as to always be part of the finished project, no matter who purchased the commission, is a female, and is not herself enslaved. The point of the setting is that all females are enslaved (or at the very least, the Sergal in this image would be, since she is clearly in a public area), and that enslavement is portrayed by a very specific design of collar around the neck, which can be seen in nearly every FoE image, fanwork or otherwise.
4. Fuasticorn is not a part of the setting, and would not ever be part of the setting, as it is an improper use of an OC by the standards of the creators of the setting.
5. Ignoring that, Fausticorn is not "decorated" as a slave in the setting would be. She doesn't wear the specific collar design, because the artist didn't know enough about the setting to know of the dress code, nor does the wing binder fit the setting, as females in the setting have their wings plucked of all feathers, and placed in very specific, confining wing binders that can be seen in any applicable FoE artwork, official or not. Again, the binder is like this because the artist didn't know enough about the setting to know the difference, nor did the commissioner give enough details to make it look right. The only thing in the image that could be considered "correct" about Fausticorn's appearance is the broken horn, but unless you are implying that all broken horn images are Fall of Equestria, that is not a defining factor.
6. As trite as it may be, the image has nothing on it indicating that it would be a fall of equestria image, and would be unrecognizable as such by any casual viewer who might have some knowledge of the setting. It is, for any who would look on it without being told "this is supposed to be a fall of Equestria image", just a random piece of furry bondage art. If site rules dictate that an image must be tagged as it appears, no one would ever tag this image as "Fall of Equestria" based on sight alone, cause it doesn't have anything that would define it as such, because it was not made at any point with the setting in mind by the artist, for reasons listed above. It is a generic, if well drawn, piece of bondage art, because that is what it was made to be. The fact that it IS generic facilitates its original YCH nature.
Again, I wouldn't even be here petitioning for a new tag if a disregard for the rules didn't make the old tag irrelevant. So long as this misrepresentation of the setting is allowed to have the tag, simply because someone who knows nothing about the setting, and never drew this piece of art with the setting in mind, says that its supposed to be for the setting, then the tag has no meaning, and literally everything is Fall of Equestria, so long as an artist says so.
Addendum: Also, and I had to confirm this, that TV Tropes page was created by, and edited by, members of the FoE community that I've personally worked with and were part of the Fall of Equestria project at one point or another. Even in your example, the definition of what makes something "Fall of Equestria" has solely been in the hands of its creators. If you don't believe me, I could invite one of the people who worked on that page here to confirm it.