Ive been seeing the lol_comments tag a lot, people keep adding it to images after some comment drama has gone on, this tag has nothing to do with the images its on, and its only added after people bitch in comments about something random/

Please destroy this useless tag

-------------

Edit: Users get banned for adding other comment related tags, so why allow this one?

example: https://e621.net/user_record?user_id=98868

ippiki ookami 1 day ago: "idiot_commenters isn't a tag you want to be adding to submissions. If you're trying to get banned, you're on the right track."

I like the tag.

ippiki_ookami said:
I like the tag.

But the tag has nothing to do with the image...honestly it shouldnt even be there, all this t6ag does is encourage drama on posts, and bad tagging

Conker said:
Ive been seeing the lol_comments tag a lot, people keep adding it to images after some comment drama has gone on, this tag has nothing to do with the images its on, and its only added after people bitch in comments about something random/

Conker said: all this tag does is encourage drama on posts, and bad tagging

1) true
2) pis-posh
post #163423
https://e621.net/post_tag_history/index?post_id=163423

Take this controversial image of 9/11.
offending whether you intended it or not. It's horribly disrepctfu = drama

Conker said:
But the tag has nothing to do with the image...honestly it shouldnt even be there, all this t6ag does is encourage drama on posts, and bad tagging

I think that you're making logical fallacy. Tag is placed because there is a drama in comments, not the other way.
I also like this tag.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
I think that you're making logical fallacy. Tag is placed because there is a drama in comments, not the other way.
I also like this tag.

The tag system has to do with in the image, not the drama people cause below it. Its what you see in the image, not whats currently in the comments.

No fun allowed.

I see conker's point. I really do. But it IS something people search for, and that's important too.

Mario583 said:
1) true
2) pis-posh
post #163423
https://e621.net/post_tag_history/index?post_id=163423

Take this controversial image of 9/11.
offending whether you intended it or not. It's horribly disrepctfu = drama

AH yes that pic. Stayed because some admin thought it was funny and boston marathon pics were removed for "being disrespectful". lol . . .

CamKitty said:
AH yes that pic. Stayed because some admin thought it was funny and boston marathon pics were removed for "being disrespectful". lol . . .

Naw, deletion reason was low quality.

Conker said:
The tag system has to do with in the image, not the drama people cause below it. Its what you see in the image, not whats currently in the comments.

Those comments are, in a way, part of the image as long as the image stays on this site.
While I also see why you wish to get rid of it do I think it should stay, it is just too amusing to read those comments.

No way, Jose.

No! I don't want that!

Conker said:
The tag system has to do with in the image, not the drama people cause below it. Its what you see in the image, not whats currently in the comments.

There are some tags allowed for comedic reasons that aren't valid under normal tagging guidelines.
This would be one of them.

Hammie said:
There are some tags allowed for comedic reasons that aren't valid under normal tagging guidelines.
This would be one of them.

Yet tags of do_not_want where it showed the char that had that face was deleted from tags, and from the TWYS rule lol_comments isnt in the image therefor it shouldnt be a tag. I know people like drama but if the tag has nothing to do with the image then it shouldnt be there

Conker said:
I know people like drama but if the tag has nothing to do with the image then it shouldn't be there

Yes, this.

Conker said:
Yet tags of do_not_want where it showed the char that had that face was deleted from tags, and from the TWYS rule lol_comments isnt in the image therefor it shouldnt be a tag. I know people like drama but if the tag has nothing to do with the image then it shouldnt be there

You're missing my point.
The tag is one that amuses the Mods and gets an exemption from TWYS for that reason.
These exemptions for comedic tags are applied on a case by case basis, not necessarily uniformly.

I like the tag as well. We could turn it into a pool if it's that much of a problem, but we need to maintain a way of keeping track of the various shit drizzle that happens on this site.

Hammie said:
You're missing my point.
The tag is one that amuses the Mods and gets an exemption from TWYS for that reason.
These exemptions for comedic tags are applied on a case by case basis, not necessarily uniformly.

..and you are missing my point. "
I know people like drama but if the tag has nothing to do with the image then it shouldn't be there" There should be no exemption to the rule of TWYS, its a tag that has nothing to do with the image or the point of tagging.

lol_comments can apply to

• post #57369: comment #121490

post #261249: comment #959675
post #164258: all of them (also ippiki )
post #174629: all
post #141889: first two comments
post #122147: fucking comments
post #72978: all, mah boi

Now, go fuck yourself :) fucking yourself is possible with current science. And portals.

Conker said:
..and you are missing my point. "
I know people like drama but if the tag has nothing to do with the image then it shouldn't be there" There should be no exemption to the rule of TWYS, its a tag that has nothing to do with the image or the point of tagging.

But there are exemptions, and that's not going to change.
My suggestion, learn to get over it because arguing about it will just get you a headache.

Conker said:
..and you are missing my point. "
I know people like drama but if the tag has nothing to do with the image then it shouldn't be there" There should be no exemption to the rule of TWYS, its a tag that has nothing to do with the image or the point of tagging.

The problem is, the tag serves a purpose.
Are you also against eastereggs in games because they break the fourth wall?
Are you against hidden tracks on a CD-Album because they don't show up in the tracklist on the back?
Are you against the addition of nihil articles to various dictionaries and encyclopedias to help in copyright infringement?

Yes they serve no purpose for the image itself, but they serve a purpose for inclined reader of lulz and drama.

This tag is one of those e6 inside joke type tags. Same thing with what_has_science_done. I say the tag stays

I'd never noticed this tag before, but after immensely enjoying browsing around https://e621.net/post/index?tags=lol_comments I vote it stays.

It's like an alias for best_posts_on_e6 :D

What does it hurt?

TheHuskyK9 said:
This tag is one of those e6 inside joke type tags. Same thing with what_has_science_done. I say the tag stays

That tag is useful as it shows images that have science gone bad, thats at least related to the image unlike lol_comments

Conker said:
That tag (what_has_science_done) is useful as it shows images that have science gone bad, thats at least related to the image unlike lol_comments

Wiki sez:
This tag is used when the comment section of an image or animation is made up of mostly funny jokes/references. Sometimes, this tag is added due to unnecessary drama in the comments.

I'd say that lol_comments has something to do with the image.

Xch3l said:
I'd say that lol_comments has something to do with the image.

when it sparks a thousand laughs.
see post #163423 and post #164258

Xch3l said:
I'd say that lol_comments has something to do with the image.

TWYS is what is IN the image, not whats in the ever changing comments.

Hammie said:
But there are exemptions, and that's not going to change.
My suggestion, learn to get over it because arguing about it will just get you a headache.

Conker said:
TWYS is what is IN the image, not whats in the ever changing comments.

Sorry dude, but I have to disagree. The comments are in a way related to the image. Otherwise, what do you even talk about in a post? The image itself.

Be it discussion, proportion, creepy comments, art style, color theme. Even the stuff that is not the center of attention on the image like the time in a clock inside the picture, plausibility of something happening, imminent_rape, scenery, location, light sources, software used, etc. etc. etc. (list goes on and on and on, like a Duracell battery, but a lot more).

Everything has a relation to something, like it or not.

Xch3l said:
Sorry dude, but I have to disagree. The comments are way related to the image. Otherwise, what do you even talk about in a post? The image itself.

You haven't seen many comments on this site, have you?

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
You haven't seen many comments on this site, have you?

Not in the same quantity as you might have. But from what I've seen, commenting starts with the image and slowly derails to nothing. also I noticed a typo

Xch3l said:
Sorry dude, but I have to disagree. The comments are in a way related to the image. Otherwise, what do you even talk about in a post? The image itself.

TYWS is to tag whats IN the image, not what people talk about in the posts even if the posts are related to the image, the posts should not change what tags go into the image if the tag for this certain thing is not in the image. To say other wise would be breaking the TWYS rule in half.

ippiki_ookami said:
I like the tag.

ippiki ookami 1 day ago "idiot_commenters isn't a tag you want to be adding to submissions. If you're trying to get banned, you're on the right track."

-------------------
O rly? Because that tag sums up lol_comments all the same, yet you didnt like that.

Conker said:
ippiki ookami 1 day ago "idiot_commenters isn't a tag you want to be adding to submissions. If you're trying to get banned, you're on the right track."

-------------------
O rly? Because that tag sums up lol_comments all the same, yet you didnt like that.

lol_comments isn't a direct insult to the commentors.
Calling them idiots is, and is therefor against site rules.

Hammie said:
lol_comments isn't a direct insult to the commentors.
Calling them idiots is, and is therefor against site rules.

They are both invalid tags about the comments and not the image, so they seem the same to me

Conker said:
They are both invalid tags about the comments and not the image, so they seem the same to me

lol_comments is endorsed by the admins, meaning it is valid, idiot_commenters isn't endorsed by the admins, ergo invalid.
In addition to that lol_comments is a bit broader than idiot_commenters.

That is kinda the same reason the tag bitch isn't to be used for female dogs.