I am bringing this up. I am really confused and honestly quite annoyed.

This started long ago with, once again, people not following the Tag What You See rule that this website is supposed to use when tagging any and all images. But this peaked and has me quite annoyed. http://e621.net/post/show/304236/doxy-female-hair-human-lol_comments-not_furry-pant

Currently it is not tagged Fluttershy, but it has been changed quite a bit. To get a point across, I was a dick and brought up the notion of humanized pictures of Rainbow Dash (like http://e621.net/post/show/303481/2013-anailaigh-blue_eyes-blush-clothing-costume-di) does not have any actual MLP correlation.

No signifying marks
No names in the piece

The only similarity is the hair and eyes. Well, Anailaigh was a character with both purple eyes and shorter rainbow hair before rainbow dash was around.

So if similar hair styles can get a human tagged as a humanized character, then shouldn't these pictures be tagged with the original character Anailaigh?

Or can we get an Admin to make a ruling that such little correlation between a character and human (hair, eyes, clothing, etc) is not enough to tag a human as a specific character using the Tag What You? See rule.

She has rainbow hair that looks exactly like Rainbow Dash. (Not all rainbow_hair looks the same, and her is completely different than Anailaigh.)
She has purple eyes, like Rainbow Dash.
She is dressed all in blue. Rainbow Dash is all blue.

So basically her whole color theme is similar to Rainbow Dash, and there are no other things that prove otherwise. I don't know if you can't see this, or you're willingly don't see it to prove your point.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
She has rainbow hair that looks exactly like Rainbow Dash. (Not all rainbow_hair looks the same, and her is completely different than Anailaigh.)
She has purple eyes, like Rainbow Dash.
She is dressed all in blue. Rainbow Dash is all blue.

So basically her whole color theme is similar to Rainbow Dash, and there are no other things that prove otherwise. I don't know if you can't see this, or you're willingly don't see it to prove your point.

What I am trying to prove is that this pictures is not supposed to be tagged Anailaigh, nor fluttershy, nor rainbow dash.

I really don't think that the hair should make a human tagged as a character. If the character had the rainbow lightning bolt/cloud somewhere on the clothing, in the corner of the drawing, etc. I would not fight it. If the character would have said "Fluttershy" in the drawing, I would not fight it. Anything to establish that the picture is of the MLP universe.

But there is nothing but hair and eye color. And as I have said: Anailaigh has purple eyes and rainbow hair. So how can you denote that it is of the MLP universe WITHOUT any outside knowledge. Tag what you see, and I don't see any direct MLP in that picture.

I am really starting to think that it is the heavy MLP fans that want these pictures that shouldn't be character tagged as such because they see MLP so much more easily than a person that is not.

_Waffles_ said:
But there is nothing but hair and eye color. And as I have said: Anailaigh has purple eyes and rainbow hair. So how can you denote that it is of the MLP universe WITHOUT any outside knowledge. Tag what you see, and I don't see any direct MLP in that picture.

Okay, you clearly haven't read my post at all. I'm done here.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
Okay, you clearly haven't read my post at all. I'm done here.

So clothing makes the difference then?

I have read it Gilda. I am just still confused how you, without a doubt, see MLP. I do see Rainbow Dash in the image, but I have to think about it and correlate the two. There is nothing inherently MLP about the picture, and that is where I am having the problem with it being tagged MLP.

Yes, I am being a bit dense, but you have to when tagging for you can not use outside knowledge. Tag What You See. I see two women with rainbow hair, blue_clothing, text, purple eyes, blue eyes, ETC.

The fact that you directly correlate it strait to MLP (or any character for that matter) without any direct symbols, wording, etc on the picture itself is where I am having a problem.

It is not just you, but a lot of other people. This is happening quite a bit, and thus the reason I am bringing it up in the forum: to get an Admin ruling on what to tag in these kinds of images.

I'd have to say I somewhat agree with Waffle's reasoning, but for a different reason.

As it stands, the tag what you see rule is extremely arbitrary in regards to character tags. On one hand, you have a picture tagged as Rainbow Dash, despite the only distinguishable characteristics being the hair and eyes (which actually there are blue eyes in that picture). On the other hand, you have pictures of characters with the same characteristics lacking similar character tags and admins saying that hair and eye color aren't enough to warrant a character tag.

You can't just say, "it's obviously Rainbow Dash!", because that same idea can be used on the Fluttershy picture. At this point, it all depends on who is looking at the picture.

So either the rule needs to be enforced much, MUCH more harshly or do something different, because clearly there is a discrepancy.

TheFrozenOne said:
So either admins need to enforce the tag what you see rule much, MUCH more harshly or do something different, because clearly there is a discrepancy.

Or we need to just not allow humanized MLP characters again, which I'm starting to lean towards if this is going to be the result of doing so. (To be clear, humanized MLP is intended to fall under the same scrutiny as any other artwork that isn't really furry-related; it's not guaranteed to be approved like most regular MLP art is.)

There's also the fact that we can simply only do so much, and must depend on our users alerting us to problems, just like they're doing here.

On that same note, I'm at work at the moment and can't really spend any time actually addressing this right now. Other admins are free to respond though of course.

Char said:
Or we need to just not allow humanized MLP characters again, which I'm starting to lean towards if this is going to be the result of doing so. (To be clear, humanized MLP is intended to fall under the same scrutiny as any other artwork that isn't really furry-related; it's not guaranteed to be approved like most regular MLP art is.)

There's also the fact that we can simply only do so much, and must depend on our users alerting us to problems, just like they're doing here.

On that same note, I'm at work at the moment and can't really spend any time actually addressing this right now. Other admins are free to respond though of course.

Well, I'm just curious, what about the possibility of simply making character tags a requirement? Removing humanized MLP is combating the symptom, not the cause. Making character tagging a rule alongside of tag-what-you see would eliminate any personal discrepancies people have.

'Cause as I've said, and I'm sure people are tired of me saying it, "tag what you see" only goes so far. We can all agree that eyes are blue or hair is rainbow, but as soon as someone tags the character, the lines blur about what the necessary and sufficient conditions are for tagging a character as such. Some people say the picture looks like Rainbow Dash, others say the opposite.

Just get rid the argument altogether by making character tags a rule of thumb. 'Cause seriously, almost every debate that has ever started has been about character tags, and for the very reasons I mentioned.

Sorry, but this thread is full of bullshit to me.

Let's see 3 pictures
pic 1
post #305623

pic 2
post #304236

pic 3
post #303481

Pic 3
For me, as I said, second character in picture 3 is clearly humanized Rainbow Dash. She has her hair all visible and it's clear that it is not only rainbow, but also in similar pattern as pony RD. No anailaigh pics seem to have this particular pattern. She has also purple eyes, and blue clothing. All pattern matches.

Pic 2
We have pussy close up, with only pink panties, and some bits of hair. There are no eyes, no clothes to match FS color theme, and not even a full view of her hair. Unless I'm missing some info on how FS's pussy looks like, then for me it's too little for tagging it FS.

Pic 1
It's just purple butt. For me it is lumpy space princess

I don't know what more I can say, so I leave it for others. But it would be a shame if because someone "was a dick" humanized mlp is going to be banned again.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
-snip-

None of those should be tagged MLP.

#1 - You are right
#2 - You are right
#3 - Hair, eyes, and shirt don't make Rainbow Dash. I see a rainbow-haired girl, not a pony from MLP. So if picture #2 had a yellow shirt and teal eyes it would suddenly become fluttershy?

TheFrozenOne said:
None of those should be tagged MLP.

#1 - You are right
#2 - You are right
#3 - Hair, eyes, and shirt don't make Rainbow Dash. I see a rainbow-haired girl, not a pony from MLP. So if picture #2 had a yellow shirt and teal eyes it would suddenly become fluttershy?

Yes, for me it works that way. You get the random girl from street. You dye her hair. You change her clothing. You give her color contact lenses. You don't make a very near close-up on her pussy. Et voila:
post #218693
it can be tagged as mlp.

And whatever the solution would be, could it be consistent with how it is determined whether OC pony should get mlp tag or not. It's rather similar problem.

Also, sorry, but from your comments under pic 1, and post #305294 it looks to me that you want to show us all how this rule is stupid regardless of anything, so I would really leave it to others. I'm too biased on this matter.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I don't know what more I can say, so I leave it for others. But it would be a shame if because someone "was a dick" humanized mlp is going to be banned again.

I am not being a dick to get things banned. I was being a dick to make people realize that they are using too much outside content to tag pictures.

People are too tunnel visioned to realize that an image from a MLP source does not get a MLP tag if there is no direct symbols, names, characters, etc in the drawing.

This whole tagging thing has got way out of hand, but most contention can be removed by specifying the rules:

-Tag what you see
-Tag all characters in the image
-Tag artist if known.

Seriously, out of danbooru, safebooru, gelbooru, furrybooru, sankaku, rule34, and so many other sites I have been to, e621 is the only one I have ever see to have tagging issues such as this.

I'm curious to know why people are so repulsed by expanding the rules to be more specific and to make more sense. Character tags should be a requirement, period. No ambiguity. No arguments. No debating "tag what you see". Just tag the character that was drawn and be done.

_Waffles_ said:

People are too tunnel visioned to realize that an image from a MLP source does not get a MLP tag if there is no direct symbols, names, characters, etc in the drawing.

And people are too tunnel vision to see that e621's tagging structure is out of date. Debates like this shouldn't even exist, and yet here we are.

I just hope there is at least one admin who is willing to at least consider the fact that maybe things should be reworked. I've been using this site since it first sprung up back in '07 and it bothers me that situations like this just get shrugged off and ignored despite how often they are being debated. Banning humanized MLP is not the solution, that is just brushing the issue under the rug.

Yes, I'm a broken record, but for good reason. I like this site and I want it to be the best it can be. I'm tired of seeing good images being buried from a lack of defining tags and arguments flooding posts because of this mess.

I normally don't bother to get involved in these mlp discussions, but this time is an exception. The only mlp I have seen, is here, on e6, yet when I saw glida's example #3 while browsing the post index shortly after it was posted, I thought "Oh, two humanized rainbow dash characters. Is this a reference to a parallel or mirror universe?"
no, I never clicked the thumbnail to find out
I, too, would hate to see any type of art prohibited simply because of some controversy regarding the method by which characters are tagged.
I know I have not really added much to this conversation, but as a person who knows next to nothing about mlp, I thought I would donate my penny.
all those words I typed aren't worth 2 pennies. lol

TheFrozenOne said:

Seriously, out of danbooru, safebooru, gelbooru, furrybooru, sankaku, rule34, and so many other sites I have been to, e621 is the only one I have ever see to have tagging issues such as this.

And yet e621 has the most accurate tags and the easiest to find drawing than any of those other sites...

I wonder why we still use our system?

_Waffles_ said:
And yet e621 has the most accurate tags and the easiest to find drawing than any of those other sites...

I wonder why we still use our system?

Let me second this: Finding shit on those other sites is anything from mediocre to awful. The fact that we have people anal-retentive over tagging on this site is actually this site's greatest asset. (Heh...Beavis...he said "asset".)

_Waffles_ said:
And yet e621 has the most accurate tags and the easiest to find drawing than any of those other sites...

I wonder why we still use our system?

I still think Danbooru holds the top spot. Danbooru doesn't allow subjective tags and some of the retarded ones we allow, and they make use of pools better instead of just throwing unnecessary tags around. They just don't have as many subclassifications because they don't allow furry art.

My experience with Danbooru has been that it's far more frustrating to find what I'm looking for than with e621, especially when the search is relatively general. For example, finding gay images here is gay -bi (to rule out bi pics). At Danbooru, I have yet to find a search doable without paying for an upgraded account (best I can figure out is three tags (multiple_boys -1girl -multiple_girls), but they put a two-tag limit on searching unless you pay up, so I can't test that). I actually like the idea of 1$gender, 2$gender, multiple_$gender etc, but they need to go along with plain $gender tags (which should be implied), so that being that specific is possible but not required.

Also, while loli/shota isn't my thing, I think that the idea of censored tags is bullshit. And the two-tag limit for searching bears mentioning again as some serious bullshit.

Snowy said:
My experience with Danbooru has been that it's far more frustrating to find what I'm looking for than with e621, especially when the search is relatively general. For example, finding gay images here is gay -bi (to rule out bi pics). At Danbooru, I have yet to find a search doable without paying for an upgraded account (best I can figure out is three tags (multiple_boys -1girl -multiple_girls), but they put a two-tag limit on searching unless you pay up, so I can't test that). I actually like the idea of 1$gender, 2$gender, multiple_$gender etc, but they need to go along with plain $gender tags (which should be implied), so that being that specific is possible but not required.

Also, while loli/shota isn't my thing, I think that the idea of censored tags is bullshit. And the two-tag limit for searching bears mentioning again as some serious bullshit.

Oh, well i've had Builder (above privileged, below Contributor) status for a long time and can still usually find what i'm looking for with 2 tags. I've rarely had to use more than 3 tags in a search, but that's just me.

I just like how they don't use tags for stuff like "hot" and "death by snoo snoo", and they make good use of pools for subjective things that aren't too general.

Dogenzaka said:
Oh, well i've had Builder (above privileged, below Contributor) status for a long time and can still usually find what i'm looking for with 2 tags. I've rarely had to use more than 3 tags in a search, but that's just me.

I just like how they don't use tags for stuff like "hot" and "death by snoo snoo", and they make good use of pools for subjective things that aren't too general.

If you have to use "death by snoo snoo" here to find a particular image in 5 tags, then there is something wrong with the person searching.

We do have a few fun tags like "lol_comments"," I can has flavor", and such, but none of these are tags that have to be known to find particular images.

I enjoy these tags for I can find some intesrting stuff. Things like Nightmare Fuel and The Truth. There is a reason why that is not the only tag on said image.

Unlike other sites, nearly every image has at least 15 tags. Most other sites are luck to get 5 on an image.

_Waffles_ said:
We do have a few fun tags like "lol_comments"," I can has flavor", and such, but none of these are tags that have to be known to find particular images.

I enjoy these tags for I can find some intesrting stuff. Things like Nightmare Fuel and The Truth. There is a reason why that is not the only tag on said image.

That's what they use pools for. They try to minimize tag clutter.

Well, before this gets derailed into something different...

Can we get an Admin's ruling on this? I would like to know what constitutes a humanized character and what is just a human.

I am still curious. Can we get an admin ruling so that this does not happen again?

So I am guessing we should just get in more and more arguments over future posts? Cool, thanks for keeping these debates going....

I will respond as soon as I'm able to. Unfortunately that's not right now, I'm extremely busy with a lot of photo work that I have to do after Furry Weekend Atlanta (I'm on staff for photography there). Because of this my ability to respond to issues is going to be greatly hindered for all but the most important problems.

I will get around to answering this as soon as I can.

Char said:
I will respond as soon as I'm able to. Unfortunately that's not right now, I'm extremely busy with a lot of photo work that I have to do after Furry Weekend Atlanta (I'm on staff for photography there). Because of this my ability to respond to issues is going to be greatly hindered for all but the most important problems.

I will get around to answering this as soon as I can.

Thank you Char, I just really did not want to see this thread get lost and ultimately have more debates over tagging issues that can be laid to rest.

_Waffles_ said:
Thank you Char, I just really did not want to see this thread get lost and ultimately have more debates over tagging issues that can be laid to rest.

Just to update, I'm going to be discussing this issue with other admins first. It may take a few more days (especially considering how insanely busy I'm going to be over this entire weekend), but we'll be making a decision on this for sure.

Perfectly understandable. I will check back in a few days. Thank you again Char

I have a feeling that this won't turn out well.

Dogenzaka said:
I have a feeling that this won't turn out well.

post #63451

Dogenzaka said:
I have a feeling that this won't turn out well.

Whatever gives you that idea?

Snowy said:
Whatever gives you that idea?

Aliens told me.

I know it's a little offtopic, since it's not about humanized, but it's still about mlp.
What do you see on this image (no looking at tags)
post #312305
I see another stupid OC character. Not even necessarily mlp character. For me it looks more like lupine_assassin than any pony character.

And it got Rainbow Dash tag. Seriously.

What next? Are we going to give RD tag to cake:
post #89642
when some idiot would say. "Oh it's my tumblr rainbow dash who was transformed by Nightmare Moon into the cake!"

I mean seriously, who would look at first picture, without outside knowledge and thought. "Hey that's totally that pony from this show!"

I dont see why you're getting so bent out of shape about this. Maybe try going for a walk or punching a mime.

ippiki_ookami said:
I dont see why you're getting so bent out of shape about this. Maybe try going for a walk or punching a mime.

I don't see why you don't see why. Obsessive tagging impulses are the main reason this site keeps working as it does; Without that, it just becomes any other image site, except with better lookup performance and a cleaner interface.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I know it's a little offtopic, since it's not about humanized, but it's still about mlp.
What do you see on this image (no looking at tags)
post #312305
I see another stupid OC character. Not even necessarily mlp character. For me it looks more like lupine_assassin than any pony character.

And it got Rainbow Dash tag. Seriously.

It just looks like RD with a hat and darker coat color. And the artist drew the ears a little bigger than the standard. Is that such a problem?

ippiki_ookami said:
I dont see why you're getting so bent out of shape about this. Maybe try going for a walk or punching a mime.

So admin, do we have a concensus on this situation and how tags should be done? We all have been very patient waiting for an answer to this problem.

I am hoping you have one instead of poking fun at people who are stil seeing/having constant tagging issues.

How about it Admin? Do you have an answer?

I think the problem here mostly lies on because people see things differently, "you say that cloud is a rabbit, but it looks more like a turtle and should be tagged as such. I can refute your claim that the weatherman predicted rabbit shaped clouds in the forecast by simply stating that 'I tags em likes I sees em' and this comment alone should win in my favor".

_Waffles_ said:
So admin, do we have a concensus on this situation and how tags should be done? We all have been very patient waiting for an answer to this problem.

I am hoping you have one instead of poking fun at people who are stil seeing/having constant tagging issues.

How about it Admin? Do you have an answer?

I just want to say that I take back what I've said in this thread before. If this is looking like RD, then I can believe that post #303481 is anailaigh, and post #305623 is either Twilight Sparkle or Lumpy Space Princess.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I just want to say that I take back what I've said in this thread before. If this is looking like RD, then I can believe that post #303481 is anailaigh, and post #305623 is either Twilight Sparkle or Lumpy Space Princess.

Yup. I know I was being harsh and dickish with saying that the post was Anailaigh, but it was because of reasons like this. It is so damn annoying that people will only use blinders. And no offense to you hopefully, it seems to be bronies primarily lately.

Also, since discorded, different looking Rainbow Dash is still Rainbow Dash I suggest alias:
nightmare_moon_(mlp) -> princess_luna_(mlp)
It's the same case.

_Waffles_ said:
So admin, do we have a concensus on this situation and how tags should be done? We all have been very patient waiting for an answer to this problem.

I am hoping you have one instead of poking fun at people who are stil seeing/having constant tagging issues.

How about it Admin? Do you have an answer?

The administration is continuing to discuss the issue, so no we don't have an answer yet.

And keep in mind that ippi is the only one making cracks about it (as he does on a lot of things), so don't feel like the administration is disrespecting you. Ippi takes nothing and no-one seriously at any time.

I found a couple more that can be debated over:

http://e621.net/post/show/198458/2012-animal_ears-blush-diamond_tiara_-mlp-female-f

http://e621.net/post/show/312623/2012-allosaurus-animal_ears-camel_toe-clothing-fem

Nothing inherently MLP except for limilar hair and eyes.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
Yes, for me it works that way. You get the random girl from street. You dye her hair. You change her clothing. You give her color contact lenses. You don't make a very near close-up on her pussy. Et voila:
post #218693
it can be tagged as mlp.

That image you linked was tagged as "equine" there is no "equine" in that image, just humans.....

Char said:
Or we need to just not allow humanized MLP characters again, which I'm starting to lean towards if this is going to be the result of doing so.

Honestly at this point I would welcome if we ban humanized-ponies, because this becoming a tagging mess again.

Honestly at this point I would welcome if we ban humanized-ponies, because this becoming a tagging mess again.

Really? Humanized ponies are only part of a larger problem. That is - how many changes can you do to character to still be able to claim it's the same character.

This "solution" would be like closing eyes to not see a problem.

Give them a time, I'm sure everything will be just fine.

I understand tagging what you see. But there's a limit to this apeshit stuff.

In the OP I easily see Fluttershy and the second as Rainbow Dash, with a less obvious character next to her. There's exactly nothing confusing about this and there are fairly obvious references to their identities.

If we're going to do this horseshit about tagging what we see to the extreme suggested here, where we can't rely in the slightest on third party content, shit's getting silly.

Of course we have to rely on outside information to recognize things. When content is about My Little Pony and the fandom can clearly recognize this without being told, there is fuckall wrong with tagging it such. If it's about Doctor Who fandom, characters and species, etc, should be tagged as such.

When clearly it's got to do with one fandom or another, tag it as such. Because we have character tags for a reason, ie to find that character.

I dont think banning humanized versions of things is going to solve anything. We will have a huge clash on why pony humans are banned, but not deamon humans/regular humans are not.

The only way to ban something and not have a a favoritism problem would be to ban a whole area.

And if we banned all MLP things, I think this site would implode. I am guessing that we are probably between 33 to 50% pony stuff now....

Judging by the number of pages when just clicking on "Posts" versus the number of pages when searching "mlp", approximately 12% of all posts are MLP-related.

Look, this does not bode well. Banning anything at all will be a disaster, and probably will come back anyway. Like the last time this happened.

And, to be honest, I don't see why we can't have a tagging system that includes both what you see AND the source/artist.

Renard_Queenston said:
Look, this does not bode well. Banning anything at all will be a disaster, and probably will come back anyway. Like the last time this happened.

And, to be honest, I don't see why we can't have a tagging system that includes both what you see AND the source/artist.

This is because they conflict.

Let's say an artist says that they drew Artica as a full female. The image is from behind and you can not tell gender. From the back this rendition of Artica looks masculin.

What do you tag? Female? Male? Herm? Ambiguous gender?

If we use Tag What You See, we tag "ambiguous gender" and "masculin". If we use artist info, you get an image of what apears to be a male furrie's butt when searching "female". If we use common identy, we now have "herm" as a tag for the original character was a herm.

As you can see, the tags get ugly fast. To counter this, we tag only what we directly see in the image and the only outside knowledge allowed is the artist (for recognition and searching) and the character's name if known.

This is the problem: if you draw artica looking like a pony with the same colors as rainbow Dash, then the tag is going to say rainbow dash. instead we have a bunch of people saying "how dare you! That is an interpetation of Artica Sparkle and it should be tagged as such!" Even though it may only have a couple similar traits to artica, it should not be tagged as such.

The biggest problem comes in when rules start getting relaxed to essentially beg artists to not have their stuff taken down. The core issue is that takedown requests are actually supported, because without them, we wouldn't even give a fuck. But oh well.

From what I've seen, the wind is blowing in the direction of TWYS being opened up (somewhat) regarding character tagging so artists stop bitching quite so much. Regarding this, not sure yet.

What those that all that mean? It pretty much means your like a spinning top in mud Waffles. Even if you get the admins ruling in your favor? What those that get you? The satisfactions of knowing you did it? and what if they rule differently? Would you continue to talk about? Yea there are some off-key tagged 'human' picture for mlp but as I can see the ones that look the most different get the most comments having a couple pissed off individuals arguing both sides and a Admin coming in and ending it and that doesn't happen often I believe.

Think that's my 2 cents plus interest and sorry for my lengthy thoughts on the matter.

_Waffles_ said:
So admin, do we have a concensus on this situation and how tags should be done? We all have been very patient waiting for an answer to this problem.

I am hoping you have one instead of poking fun at people who are stil seeing/having constant tagging issues.

How about it Admin? Do you have an answer?

How about you stop calling me admin.

ippiki_ookami said:
How about you stop calling me admin.

Ok, Test Janitor(still active option odd)

_Waffles_ said:
Stuff.

Well, if an artist drew this Arctica Sparkle as a female, then s/he wouldn't draw her looking masculine. And that artist should have forseen the tagging arguments if that picture was uploaded here, so they would either not post it here or asked to be put on the DNP list.

And anyway, I don't even know what Arctica looks like. So, your first point is made invalid.

Besides, who would even recolour something to look like a pony? It would make much more sense to simply draw an actual pony, rather than make something from an entirely different species look like one.

Falord said:

..... Here's my 2 cents.....

Tags are just that tags. They are used to identify an image in question. You tag what you see and what it suggests. If you don't see something in the image you don't tag it correct?

There some humanized mlp things I like, but the question is how far off must it be to not deserve the tag? post #305623 and post #304236 are pretty good examples. But have noticed there not tagged mlp. So enough people did not feel those two posts warranted the tag and it was settled by people that browse here, not some automated system. There well be human error/inconsistencies at time but it is still works Or furry in some cases XD.

Here's 20% more
If you had used an actual image it would have been better but lets see. We tag what we see, If we see a character breasts and a giant dick and the artist on the site he posted it on said it was ambiguous gender... Would you tag as such or tag it dickgirl? The artist is subjective to what he/she is creating... There are many images here tag dickgirl, but wheir it was original posted it's tagged herm.

Tags get ugly fast!? I don't see that. Where supposed to be an 'adult' At least physically to browse this site, so I don't think we'll have a spam of tagme's or really stupid tags since there is a 4 tag limit and few tag monsters here that would love to fix it <.< >.> Hell you could try helping fix tags and talk on the post in question why you removed/added said tags or something but you may spawn a lol_comments moment if you try it on the right post. Don't be a tag vandal about it tho...

That thing about artica as a pony!? I don't know who artica is but if it supposed to be that character ponified and the artist meant it to be that way then change the tags to suit... post #257623 had a similar problem with a character looking like a crossgender version of scootaloo, but the artist of the image said it was his oc of what scootaloo's twin brother would look like aka a oc with scootaloo's color scheme So what those this all mean? Just look here and be satisfied with that or just search 'Bad Sonic O...

What those that all that mean? It pretty much means your like a spinning top in mud Waffles. Even if you get the admins ruling in your favor? What those that get you? The satisfactions of knowing you did it? and what if they rule differently? Would you continue to talk about? Yea there are some off-key tagged 'human' picture for mlp but as I can see the ones that look the most different get the most comments having a couple pissed off individuals arguing both sides and a Admin coming in and ending it and that doesn't happen often I believe.

Think that's my 2 cents plus interest and sorry for my lengthy thoughts on the matter.

This is what I truly want:

I want a direct link to an admin, Char especially, that will give a direct ruling on how to tag in these situations.

I would like a direct link to stop all the stupid debates in the comment sections. A direct ruling to end bickering and tag wars.

ippiki_ookami said:
How about you stop calling me admin.

You dont like your title?

It is like calling a sergeant by his first name. If someone has worked to the point of having a title, I am going to address them as such.

I'm drunk but I still know what's rude, Member.

_Waffles_ said:
You dont like your title?

It is like calling a sergeant by his first name. If someone has worked to the point of having a title, I am going to address them as such.

I think he was referring to his account name rather than his title...

Lance_Armstrong said:
I'm drunk but I still know what's rude, Member.

I know it may have been taken as rude. You know what else could be taken as rude? Being in a supervisory position and poking fun at someone bringing up a tagging issue in a thread about a tagging issues.

_Waffles_ said:
I know it may have been taken as rude. You know what else could be taken as rude? Being in a supervisory position and poking fun at someone bringing up a tagging issue in a thread about a tagging issues.

Welcome to anywhere that ippi is. Making fun of random things seems to be his day's entertainment.

Any census yet?

_Waffles_ said:
Any census yet?

Dude, you asked already few days ago. This type of behavior is rather counterproductive.

_Waffles_ said:
Any census yet?

Yes, but it's three years old. You're gonna have to wait a decade for a more up to date one.

_Waffles_ said:
Any census yet?

No, again I've been too busy. I finally completed my time-sensitive project that was eating up all my free time though this past weekend, so I'm gradually getting caught back up on e621 now. We do have an admin forum thread going on right now about the issue, but I've only been able to respond every few days or so as time permits.

Right now I'm trying to catch back up again on the weeks' worth of e-mails and takedown requests that have piled up while I've been so busy. It shouldn't be much longer now before I can finally start giving the issue here some more attention.

Alright, I will check back in another 5 days.

Another 5 days...?

_Waffles_ said:
Another 5 days...?

No, sorry, I was just out of town all weekend, and didn't want to start this discussion up again knowing that I was going to be absent for several days.

Please continue the discussion here: http://e621.net/forum/show/66521