Can we have a male_human and female_human tag, there's a huge difference between porn that contains a male human and a female human, even if it's still straight, I don't want to see female humans and I have blacklisted

Human female female_on_feral
human female solo -male
human female female_on_anthro
human female feral_penetrating
human female anthro penetrating
human female_on_feral
human female_on_anthro
human female human_penetrated
human -anthro -feral female

Yet with ALL this there is many that get past it, or some that get caught by my blacklist despite not being what I'm trying to avoid. Normally I wouldn't complain about this because of the blacklist feature, but all I'm asking is for one extra tag so that the blacklist can be much easier to use for this circumstance

We will not be adding <gender>_<species> tags to the system.

notmenotyou said:
We will not be adding <gender>_<species> tags to the system.

What about <gender>_<form>? Human is considered to be both a species and a form, and while it would certainly be way too much of a hassle to have gendered species tags, there would be far fewer gendered form tags in comparison.

kemonophonic said:
We need to alias away the male_anthro, female_anthro, anthro_male and anthro_female tags, among others. I just removed a whole lot of male_human and male_humanoid tags.

I could have my bot remove those and replace them with the correct tags, if there's a list of them. The problem with aliasing them is they can only be aliased to one tag, whereas my bot could turn anthro_male to anthro male, for example.

kemonophonic said:
That would be greatly appreciated! The tags are:

male_anthro female_anthro anthro_male anthro_female

Sure, I'll sort those out later tonight, let me know if there's any others that need fixing as well. I was going to suggest the feral variants, but it looks like they've been aliased to male and female.

watsit said:
What about <gender>_<form>? Human is considered to be both a species and a form, and while it would certainly be way too much of a hassle to have gendered species tags, there would be far fewer gendered form tags in comparison.

kemonophonic said:
That would be greatly appreciated! The tags are:

male_anthro female_anthro anthro_male anthro_female

I feel like these ones ought to be kept. It's not about gender_species, it's about gender_form.

pup said:
Sure, I'll sort those out later tonight, let me know if there's any others that need fixing as well. I was going to suggest the feral variants, but it looks like they've been aliased to male and female.

You shouldn't nuke a bunch of tags just because one person complained about it.
Personally, I don't mind having <gender>_<form> tags. It's not causing tag bloat, like with the <gender>_<species>, and I believe that tags like that may be useful for narrowing down specific searches.

furrin_gok said:
I feel like these ones ought to be kept. It's not about gender_species, it's about gender_form.

bitwolfy said:
You shouldn't nuke a bunch of tags just because one person complained about it.
Personally, I don't mind having <gender>_<form> tags. It's not causing tag bloat, like with the <gender>_<species>, and I believe that tags like that may be useful for narrowing down specific searches.

But then feral_male, male_feral, feral_female and female_feral are already aliased to male/female. This would just be the other side of it as it looks like the anthro tags were forgotten more than anything.

Obviously I'll hold off on those given there's objections, but given the other tags are aliased I was going to remove them in a way that was better than aliasing, making sure to add both tags if either are missing, then an alias could be made after if it's wanted.

I'd be all for <gender>_<form> tags.

strikerman said:
I'd be all for <gender>_<form> tags.

+1

strikerman said:
I'd be all for <gender>_<form> tags.

Fuck it, I'm in too. Save me the effort of trying to think of what the correct tag combinations are to get these simple results.

The bulk update request #858 has been rejected.

remove alias male_feral (5802) -> male (2499539)
remove alias feral_male (0) -> male (2499539)
remove alias feral_maleherm (0) -> maleherm (4465)
remove alias feral_herm (0) -> herm (27238)
remove alias feral_female (0) -> female (2543286)
remove alias female_feral (4775) -> female (2543286)
remove alias feral_andromorph (0) -> andromorph (23369)
remove alias feral_gynomorph (0) -> gynomorph (193268)
remove alias human_male (0) -> human (372097)
remove alias human_female (0) -> human (372097)
remove alias female_human (3641) -> invalid_tag (-10)

Reason: To support the gender_form tags.

EDIT: The bulk update request #858 (forum #308943) has been rejected by @slyroon.

furrin_gok said:
Reason: To support the gender_form tags.

The post-unalias list is missing female variants. Also what should be done with taur, since they're essentially a separate form and shouldn't be tagged as anthro/feral/human(oid), but there are differences with the top half being human(oid) or anthro (maybe even feral in some more creative cases) with the bottom being feral. Seems weird also that taur is a species tag when it's not a species, but a form that one or more species can be in (like anthro and feral, which aren't a species tag).

watsit said:
The post-unalias list is missing female variants. Also what should be done with taur, since they're essentially a separate form and shouldn't be tagged as anthro/feral/human(oid), but there are differences with the top half being human(oid) or anthro (maybe even feral in some more creative cases) with the bottom being feral. Seems weird also that taur is a species tag when it's not a species, but a form that one or more species can be in (like anthro and feral, which aren't a species tag).

Added female forms to the list, whoops. I probably replaced it with the intersex tags that I didn't originally have in my notepad.

Adding taurs seems like a useful extra, but we'll have to change the category away from species. Does everybody agree with that?

furrin_gok said:
Adding taurs seems like a useful extra, but we'll have to change the category away from species. Does everybody agree with that?

That'd probably be best left to a separate thread, instead of stapling another discussion into here.

+1 to having gender_form tags. This is something I've honestly been questioning why it hasn't already been done. It would make a lot of searching easier, without dipping into the rabbit hole of gender_species, as others have mentioned here (and many have complained about elsewhere). My only question is if ambiguous_gender should be included, or if that doesn't need to be given the same treatment.

Can someone explain to me whats actually being discussed here and why are we adding a tag cloud that NMNY explicitly opened the thread saying were not adding?

demesejha said:
Can someone explain to me whats actually being discussed here and why are we adding a tag cloud that NMNY explicitly opened the thread saying were not adding?

NMNY said not to add <gender>_<species>, e.g. male_dog or female_cat. We're discussing adding <gender>_<form>, e.g. male_feral or female_humanoid.

demesejha said:
Can someone explain to me whats actually being discussed here and why are we adding a tag cloud that NMNY explicitly opened the thread saying were not adding?

Because it's a royal pain in the ass to locate specific genders of specific creature types;

Ergo; "female feral" will pull up;
female ferals (desired)
male ferals with a female non-feral (not desired)
hermaphrodite or intersex ferals with a female non-feral (not desired)
female non-ferals with a bug or bird in the background
a menagerie of various male and female characters of varying body types, anthro, humanoid, and feral, and varying genders, male, female, and otherwise, without a female feral.

votp said:
Because it's a royal pain in the ass to locate specific genders of specific creature types;

Ergo; "female feral" will pull up;
female ferals (desired)
male ferals with a female non-feral (not desired)
hermaphrodite or intersex ferals with a female non-feral (not desired)
female non-ferals with a bug or bird in the background
a menagerie of various male and female characters of varying body types, anthro, humanoid, and feral, and varying genders, male, female, and otherwise, without a female feral.

While not perfect, here's some searches that have very high success rates:

female feral -male -intersex -ambiguous_gender
female feral ~male_on_feral ~intersex_on_feral ~ambiguous_on_feral
female feral_on_feral

Specific pairing stuff:

male_on_feral male/female
intersex_on_feral intersex/female
ambiguous_on_feral ambiguous/female
female/female feral
female feral solo

You're not going to find everything in a single search, but these help as a workaround.

The [gender]_on_[form] tags were originally proposed as a way of somewhat resolving this problem without causing too much tag bloat, since they allow for better searching precision in this regard, but were suggested back in the day when the site obviously was more worried about tag-bloat being a thing and did more to curtail it. I am not opposed to [gender]_[form] tags in the current state of the site, or at least not any more so than I am opposed to any other general form of tag bloat. We've already got tags like cetancodontamorph humanoid, after all.

clawdragons said:
While not perfect, here's some searches that have very high success rates:

female feral -male -intersex -ambiguous_gender
female feral ~male_on_feral ~intersex_on_feral ~ambiguous_on_feral
female feral_on_feral

Specific pairing stuff:

male_on_feral male/female
intersex_on_feral intersex/female
ambiguous_on_feral ambiguous/female
female/female feral
female feral solo

You're not going to find everything in a single search, but these help as a workaround.

The [gender]_on_[form] tags were originally proposed as a way of somewhat resolving this problem without causing too much tag bloat, since they allow for better searching precision in this regard, but were suggested back in the day when the site obviously was more worried about tag-bloat being a thing and did more to curtail it. I am not opposed to [gender]_[form] tags in the current state of the site, or at least not any more so than I am opposed to any other general form of tag bloat. We've already got tags like cetancodontamorph humanoid, after all.

The examples given are... kinda my point. I'm actually for gendered species tags, but understand that would result in... well, nightmares (maybe gendered "vague" tags would be better, like canid_female or what have you rather than specific species, but that's beyond the scope here).
The idea that you need to go to such lengths to achieve what really should be a simple thing to search for and, even then, is still going to pull irrelevant things anyway/exclude relevant things anyway, should be a pretty strong argument in favour of *_feral/*_anthro/*_humanoid. I dunno, maybe I'm just lazy.

clawdragons said:
While not perfect, here's some searches that have very high success rates:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the various *_on_* tags, as well as the <gender>/<gender> tags only apply to romantic/sexual posts? I know a lot of people come here for the porn, but those don't help narrow down searches if you happen to be looking for a post that's rated Safe (and shows no romantic behavior between any of the characters). For someone like me, who frequents e926's side of things, trying to find some pictures is a logistical nightmare because there's not really any searches that can help pin them down.

votp said:
is still going to pull irrelevant things anyway/exclude relevant things anyway, should be a pretty strong argument in favour of *_feral/*_anthro/*_humanoid. I dunno, maybe I'm just lazy.

vulkalu said:
For someone like me, who frequents e926's side of things, trying to find some pictures is a logistical nightmare because there's not really any searches that can help pin them down.

Here's the thing. We've got over two million posts on this site. With an extremely rough estimate of a median number of species tags at around 4 or 5, we're talking about adding around ten million new tags to pictures. Tags that often couldn't be added from a thumbnail, either, slowing down many possible time-saving measures. If we could get around 100 people to agree to spend an hour a day tagging for a fully year we could maybe get it done. Which is totally unrealistic.

Here's a more realistic estimate. Look at the [gender]_(lore) tags. They've been around for a year, and male_(lore) has been tagged 3.2k times. This is the vast, vast minority of tags to which the tag is applicable. So, this gives us an idea of the rate at which massive tag projects (which [gender]_[form] would fit into) tags might be applied. At this rate, it would take around 720 years just to catch up on the backlog of posts.

It will never be effective for searching. If it's added, it'll get tagged inconsistently on new posts, almost never on old posts, and you'll be forced to still use the same workarounds you always have. Everyone loves the idea of having these tags. Of course, if there was just a button to press and they would pop into existence, that would be awesome. But when you look at the reality of things, the amount of time and effort required just will not happen.

I'm not trying to be rude, I'm really not, but frankly, this is all a fantasy.

The reason the [gender]_on_[form] tags worked is BECAUSE they were limited in scope and effort. I'm the one who advocated for those, and I crafted them in a way that was realistic. And even then, it wasn't easy.

clawdragons said:
Here's the thing. We've got over two million posts on this site. With an extremely rough estimate of a median number of species tags at around 4 or 5, we're talking about adding around ten million new tags to pictures. Tags that often couldn't be added from a thumbnail, either, slowing down many possible time-saving measures. If we could get around 100 people to agree to spend an hour a day tagging for a fully year we could maybe get it done. Which is totally unrealistic.

Here's a more realistic estimate. Look at the [gender]_(lore) tags. They've been around for a year, and male_(lore) has been tagged 3.2k times. This is the vast, vast minority of tags to which the tag is applicable. So, this gives us an idea of the rate at which massive tag projects (which [gender]_[form] would fit into) tags might be applied. At this rate, it would take around 720 years just to catch up on the backlog of posts.

It will never be effective for searching. If it's added, it'll get tagged inconsistently on new posts, almost never on old posts, and you'll be forced to still use the same workarounds you always have. Everyone loves the idea of having these tags. Of course, if there was just a button to press and they would pop into existence, that would be awesome. But when you look at the reality of things, the amount of time and effort required just will not happen.

I'm not trying to be rude, I'm really not, but frankly, this is all a fantasy.

The reason the [gender]_on_[form] tags worked is BECAUSE they were limited in scope and effort. I'm the one who advocated for those, and I crafted them in a way that was realistic. And even then, it wasn't easy.

people said the same thing about trio but that's been going pretty well so far

So what if not every single person uses the tag? So what if it gets mistagged? The same could be said about each and every single tag on this site.

strikerman said:
people said the same thing about trio but that's been going pretty well so far

So what if not every single person uses the tag? So what if it gets mistagged? The same could be said about each and every single tag on this site.

Trio is a single tag (not like 50), is easier to determine from a thumbnail, can be reasonably applied via tag-script, applies only to a minority of posts (Only 1/10th of images on this site are tagged with "group" in the first place). Overall the amount of work is far less.

The issue isn't with not everyone using the tag, or with occasional mistags. It's that if a tag is applied to the extreme minority of images, it's not useful. A tag that is tagged (correctly) 99% of the time is not comparable in usefulness to a bunch of tags that are tagged 1% of the time.

Edit: to be clear as to the problem here and why the difference in the number of images matters so much.

At the current rate of tagging for trio, compared to the number of applicable images (tested with a random sample of images), and accounting for the rate that new posts come in, the tagging for trio is at about 500% of what is needed for maintenance, meaning that the backlog will be addressed relatively quickly, and the tag ought to be adopted without too much trouble.

If we assume a similar tagging rate for [gender]_[form] tags, given the number of applicable posts, we're talking about only having around 18% of what is needed for just maintenance (not addressing backlog).

Would the rate be similar? Would it be higher or lower? There's various factors that affect this, and it's difficult to predict for sure. But we have to assume way more effort would go into this than any other tag project I've seen that could be reasonably compared. And frankly, the benefit just doesn't seem substantial enough to justify that.

I know it's daunting to create a whole new category of gender_form tags and that they might not ever make it to all the images which should have them, but I think they're useful enough to be worth it anyway.

furrin_gok said:
Added female forms to the list, whoops. I probably replaced it with the intersex tags that I didn't originally have in my notepad.

Adding taurs seems like a useful extra, but we'll have to change the category away from species. Does everybody agree with that?

I think we should use split_form rather than taur. That covers taur + lamia + merfolk + faun + misc. It's not well tagged except for lamias (probably because it's not on the upload screen), but I think it's perfect for this.

I would literally go through and tag this shit as I see it as my entertainment for the day. Never underestimate the power of annoyance when applying new tagging methods.

Bump
Furrin gok's BUR seems to be missing an
unalias male_human -> human

snpthecat said:
Bump
Furrin gok's BUR seems to be missing an
unalias male_human -> human

feral_intersex should also be added. I think that should be everything (did an automated scan for every combo of every gender/form tag I could think of).

tittybitty said:
I think we should use split_form rather than taur. That covers taur + lamia + merfolk + faun + misc. It's not well tagged except for lamias (probably because it's not on the upload screen), but I think it's perfect for this.

So taurs are supposed to get that tag? I posted a number of taurs recently and was following momentum and not adding it. Does that need an implication added? Or was there a reason that implication doesn't exist? Oh, I answered my own question already, it's not an implication because split_form specifies the two forms be different species, when many taurs are split feral/anthro of the same species. What a mess

arrow189 said:
So taurs are supposed to get that tag? I posted a number of taurs recently and was following momentum and not adding it. Does that need an implication added? Or was there a reason that implication doesn't exist?

Centaurs (human upper, horse lower) would get it, furry-taurs like chakats would not, if I am reading correctly.

votp said:
Centaurs (human upper, horse lower) would get it, furry-taurs like chakats would not, if I am reading correctly.

furry taurs that are two separate species with a clear defining line would also get split_form, although that's very rarely, if ever, a thing.

Having human_male and human_female tags would make searching and filtering so much easier.

+1 for <gender>_<form> and I hope if those are instated, we can remove the insane explosion of rarely-used combo tags like male_penetrating_anthro that were made to get around the lack of <gender>_<form>.

cloudpie said:
+1 for <gender>_<form> and I hope if those are instated, we can remove the insane explosion of rarely-used combo tags like male_penetrating_anthro that were made to get around the lack of <gender>_<form>.

E6 in a shellnut; "we don't want tag bloat, so we're deleting this combo tag that applies to a specific thing, instead use five brand new tags in tandem to look for it"

votp said:
E6 in a shellnut; "we don't want tag bloat, so we're deleting this combo tag that applies to a specific thing, instead use five brand new tags in tandem to look for it"

LOL. "Do you want 20 terms that grow linearly, or do you want 3 terms that grow exponentially?" The math take on the number of tags needed where a term in the sum is a given form of tag. i.e. <species>_on_<species> would be a hell of a term in growth rate. There's some cutoff where the linear growth is slower, like with species combo tags. That is at least equivalent to cubic term, if not quartic or exponential/power function.

The cub implosion certainly makes a clear case for more generic(ally applicable) tags, and less vague tags like cub that cover EVERYTHING or overly specific tags like dog_wearing_a_sweater_and_necklace . Lolishota project is going to be the sequel, I guarantee!

alphamule said:
LOL. "Do you want 20 terms that grow linearly, or do you want 3 terms that grow exponentially?" The math take on the number of tags needed where a term in the sum is a given form of tag. i.e. <species>_on_<species> would be a hell of a term in growth rate. There's some cutoff where the linear growth is slower, like with species combo tags. That is at least equivalent to cubic term, if not quartic or exponential/power function.

The cub implosion certainly makes a clear case for more generic(ally applicable) tags, and less vague tags like cub that cover EVERYTHING or overly specific tags like dog_wearing_a_sweater_and_necklace . Lolishota project is going to be the sequel, I guarantee!

I mean, I think most people will take

(fe)male_human(oid)/feral/anthro/taur
intersex_human(oid)/feral/anthro/taur
gyn/andromorph_human(oid)/feral/anthro/taur

as these are as static things in an image that have fairly clear-cut, immediately-recognizable TWYS applicability, unlike the young/cub/loli/shota tags which can vary dependant on perception of the individual user, to the extent the sex/gender tags already are. There's only so many forms characters can take, and only so many permutations of primary/secondary/tertiary sexual characteristics they can have. These tags are applicable, like, say, a species or gender tag, to any content involving a character of that permutation. It boggles the mind that the *_penetrating/ed tags were ever considered to make more sense for this as they can inherently only apply to sexual posts and don't solve anything beyond being a half-assed workaround.
If we had a subtagging system, this would not be needed as we could effectively blob together a tag that has those tags listed in it as "subject with this tag also applies theses tags", but that'd be a fucking nightmare to code and keep cleaned up.

The bulk update request #858 (forum #308943) has been rejected by @slyroon.

Took ya three years, huh?

votp said:
Took ya three years, huh?

Well, there is topic #41891 to consider.