The bulk update request #699 is active.

remove alias unwilling_prey (3570) -> invalid_tag (37)
remove alias willing_prey (4237) -> invalid_tag (37)

Reason: alias #4089 (and alias #4098) was created in 2013 with the rationale that "you can't classify a dude in the image as prey or unwilling due to lacking TWYS". The tag landscape has changed significantly since then, "prey" is now the accepted term for a character being vored (regardless of orifice, "vore hardness", etc.) and willing_vore and unwilling_vore have been gaining in popularity of late (see also topic #26825), so I figure freeing up those two might be useful in clearing up some of the more ambiguous parts of those tags later on.

EDIT: The bulk update request #699 (forum #305385) has been approved by @Millcore.

I really don't see the point in de-aliasing the unwilling one. If it's not tagged with "willing_vore," then it kinda' stands to reason that it's unwilling...

jacob said:
I really don't see the point in de-aliasing the unwilling one. If it's not tagged with "willing_vore," then it kinda' stands to reason that it's unwilling...

Two separate acts could be depicted in the same post, one of them willing and the other one unwilling.

gattonero2001 said:
Two separate acts could be depicted in the same post, one of them willing and the other one unwilling.

Okay, allow me to rephrase: Unwilling vore seems more the rule than the exception, so I feel like the only time there's any need to specify whether it's willing or not, is when it IS willing.

jacob said:
I really don't see the point in de-aliasing the unwilling one. If it's not tagged with "willing_vore," then it kinda' stands to reason that it's unwilling...

A surprising amount of stuff under unwilling_vore actually has the prey be the unwilling one, so I guess there's some grounds for having it.

fifteen said:
A surprising amount of stuff under unwilling_vore actually has the prey be the unwilling one, so I guess there's some grounds for having it.

That, too, is more the rule than the exception.

jacob said:
Okay, allow me to rephrase: Unwilling vore seems more the rule than the exception, so I feel like the only time there's any need to specify whether it's willing or not, is when it IS willing.

jacob said:
That, too, is more the rule than the exception.

I mean, the same could be said about oral_vore or pregnant_female, but that doesn't mean there won't ever be any value in starting to tag these at some point. I'm only proposing to unalias those tags to free them up, I only really have a clear plan for willing_prey. If unwilling_prey is something people are willing to start tagging or searching or blacklisting, more power to them. I just don't see why it should be considered an invalid tag.

fifteen said:
I just don't see why it should be considered an invalid tag.

This. If people really don't want one or both of these tags, they can at least be aliased to vore itself (or some subset of it), rather than invalid. There really doesn't seem to be a reason to keep them invalid, especially if the invalid tag is going to get phased out.

The bulk update request #699 (forum #305385) has been approved by @Millcore.