Implicating monsters -> monster.

Reason:

should be an alias, no need for both plural and singular tag of the same thing.

Hammie said:
should be an alias, no need for both plural and singular tag of the same thing.

Maybe people want to find images with multiple monsters in them.

Digital_Kindness said:
Maybe people want to find images with multiple monsters in them.

We don't use females tags and the likes.
So I doubt this will approved.

Digital_Kindness said:
Maybe people want to find images with multiple monsters in them.

if you allow this for any tag, you must then allow it for every tag, and that's pointless and excessive.

Fair enough, I see now that plurals being implied to singulars is not the general practice. I'm just getting used to all this.

I'm a bit confused as to why it isn't the general practice though, would allowing plural tags really be pointless and excessive? It adds useful information, and the implication system would ensure that anyone looking for "monster" would still see all the posts tagged as "monsters"

The only downside would be that tag lists would get visually clogged up with "monster monsters", "male males", "female females" and the like. But even that seems like a problem that ought to be solved in software rather than by never using plural tags. There's no reason that the implied tags should actually take up a whole spot in the tag list, they could just be tucked away in a dropdown arrow beside the tag that implied them.

In summary: okay, I see this isn't the way we do things, but why not do them this way?

Wyvrn said:
I'm a bit confused as to why it isn't the general practice though, would allowing plural tags really be pointless and excessive? It adds useful information, and the implication system would ensure that anyone looking for "monster" would still see all the posts tagged as "monsters"

The only downside would be that tag lists would get visually clogged up with "monster monsters", "male males", "female females" and the like. But even that seems like a problem that ought to be solved in software rather than by never using plural tags. There's no reason that the implied tags should actually take up a whole spot in the tag list, they could just be tucked away in a dropdown arrow beside the tag that implied them.

In summary: okay, I see this isn't the way we do things, but why not do them this way?

Because, as you said, then the tag list would be bloated with a bunch of duplicate tags. Imagine how bad female females male males pussy pussies penis penises knot knots fox foxes dog dogs would look on a post with lots of characters in it.

But do you agree that that's something that could be solved in software?

I mean the tag list is already chock full of redundancy. Every time a time a tag implication is triggered, both the implying and implied tag appear in the tag list, even though by definition the implying tag would be enough.

Why not tuck the implied tag away in a dropdown? Something like this. That would clear out all the bloat that already exists, and would free us to make improvements to the taggng system - such as using plurals and implying them to singulars - without adding any bloat to the tag lists at all.

I realize that as the site's coder you'll be hard to sway, but isn't it a shame to cripple the tagging system - in however minor a way - just because the software isn't smart enough to hide some redundancy?