Aliasing huge_balls → big_balls
Link to alias

Reason:

O.o

No.

We use huge_ balls to denote that these are bigger than big_balls but not yet hyper_balls.

Nein.
-1 from me for the same reason as Nimmy.

Disagree, balls -> big balls -> huge balls -> hyper balls works as a scale of gradations, just as with the penis line.

Though the boundaries for either aren't really set in stone, I guess, and can be somewhat vague especially between big and huge. They mostly appear to rely on common sense, as well as the realization that the size of regular dicks and balls in furry art is already out of whack with reality, in the sense that a cock has to be pretty dang sizeable to even be considered just big_penis.

On a related note, has anyone ever noticed how horsecocks that aren't hyper material almost never get tagged with a *large size* tag? I actually agree with that, since being big is their status quo and because of that it's pretty unremarkable, but I think it's funny how much of a hivemind there seems to be regarding the subject. Peculiar.

One of these days, we'll have to make a good guide (with example thumbnails) for tagging those. They get tagged almost randomly: some huge_balls are smaller than average big_balls, etc.

I'm rarely sure myself about which tag to use..

Genjar said:
One of these days, we're going to need to make a good guide (with example thumbnails) for tagging those. They get tagged almost randomly: some huge_balls are smaller than average big_balls, etc.

I'm rarely sure myself about which tag to use..

This. Same is true of breast sizes and penis sizes. Someday...

Ok, not aliasing this, but what about implicating it?

It seems that the definition of big_balls is "balls that are abnormally bigger" since it was implicated with hyper_balls.

That brings up a question I have about all sets of tags that go something like this for muscles, boobs, fat, cocks, and so on. Example:

Whatever, big_whatever, huge_whatever, hyper_whatever, etc.

Should the larger one implicate the next size down, and then so on in a chain? Or should they be mutually exclusive? Personally, I prefer the later, because people looking for big_boobs are most likely not also looking for hyper_boobs, but would still get those in a search.

Also, I hink we should put a list, in order, in each of the wiki's that has a 'chain' of related tags like this. It's currently very hard to know when something should be tagged with the big, or huge, or large, or massive, or hyper versions unless you want to click through a chain of implications that might not exist.

For me the scale goes.

Normal - Easy to define, look down your pants (kek).

Big - Ranging from cue ball to apple-sized ones.

Huge - Larger than apples, clearly larger than than big balls, but not big enough to be tagged hyper. The peep with the balls wouldn't be able to realistically walk with em' between his legs.

Hyper - Melon sized. Any type of monstrosity larger than a football. Anything even close to looking like Randy's balls from South Park gets tagged with hyper.

The_Great_Wolfgang said:
Ok, not aliasing this, but what about implicating it?

It seems that the definition of big_balls is "balls that are abnormally bigger" since it was implicated with hyper_balls.

I'm against it. I know we've already done that for several things, but in my experience it makes it harder to search for a certain size, not easier. I know tag usage on these things is all over the place, but we need to come up with a consistent sizing system that can be objectively applied...not create an implication train that makes it impossible to distinctly search for just one size.

Tokaido said:
Should the larger one implicate the next size down, and then so on in a chain? Or should they be mutually exclusive? Personally, I prefer the later, because people looking for big_boobs are most likely not also looking for hyper_boobs, but would still get those in a search.

The latter, no doubt. I don't want any skippyballs or sewer pipes turning up in my searches for wangs, gonads and tits that are big, but still within the realms of believability.

Also against, for the reasons already mentioned.
I know that breasts are implicated that way, but maybe we should consider unimplicating those..

Genjar said:
Also against, for the reasons already mentioned.
I know that breasts are implicated that way, but maybe we should consider unimplicating those..

Muscles kind of are too, I would like to unimplement them, and all others, but I thought I was maybe some on that :P

Genjar said:
Also against, for the reasons already mentioned.
I know that breasts are implicated that way, but maybe we should consider unimplicating those..

Tokaido said:
Muscles kind of are too, I would like to unimplement them, and all others, but I thought I was maybe some on that :P

I'd love to UNimplicate all of those at some point. We do need to come up with a better system for referencing which is which, but the current implication trains on those are only making it harder to solve and use.

furrypickle said:
I'd love to UNimplicate all of those at some point. We do need to come up with a better system for referencing which is which, but the current implication trains on those are only making it harder to solve and use.

I think that just updating the wiki would help. Like at the bottom of the boobs wiki have

Boob sizes are categorized in this order (On phone, so just guessing at tag names)
flat_chest
small_breasts
big_breasts
huge_breasts
hyper_breasts

And then just alias all other sizes to their closest tag on the list, same for muscles, body weight, penis size, etc.

Tokaido said:
I think that just updating the wiki would help. Like at the bottom of the boobs wiki have

This is somewhat unconventional, but how about a format similar to this copied to each of the breasts wikis:

General: breasts

Breast size is set on a tiered system yada yada there is always be in-between cases so tag as best as something something.

__________________________________________________

flat chested

post #249055 post #212780 post #341527

Description of what the tag means.

• something something don't confuse for cuntboy something male body
• Don't use for loli not-breasts-yet breasts

__________________________________________________

small breasts

post #162139 post #307798 post #76349 post #434015

Not flat chested, but pretty small

• Something notable
• Something else notable

__________________________________________________

big breasts

post #494070 post #267786 post #275532

something something roughly equivalent to a D-cup

• Something notable

__________________________________________________

huge breasts

post #515945 post #284187 post #285976 post #403086

Still physically plausible to somewhat unlikely.

• Something notable

Random joke about milk.

__________________________________________________

hyper breasts

From too large to physically carry and beyond.

• Useful stuff
• Not to be confused with hyperactive_breasts

post #512478 post #539334 post #536890 post #456821

__________________________________________________

See also:

• nipples
• teats

Disclaimer: This is pretty half-assed. Also, I'm not suggesting that any of the points should be implemented, I'm just showing what it might look like.

Unrelated, but it's painful how "mistagged" a lot of these posts are (relative to each other).

Wow, that looks great! But the tag fixing may take a while.

https://e621.net/forum/show/111230