Implicating selfcest -> square_crossover.

Reason: If I understand correctly then selfcest is a square_crossover involving sex.

Never heard of square crossover before...

I have never heard of this term before. What is the etymology of it?

furballs_dc said:
Never heard of square crossover before...

furballs_dc said:
Never heard of square crossover before..

Azazial said:
I have never heard of this term before. What is the etymology of it?

Conker said: what Furball said

Don't use words that we are unfamiliar with; people aren't going to ever use that tag.

...211 tag instances...what is wrong with people?

But... the implication is actually correct, selfcest would count as square crossover because it contains two of the same character.
also the images using it are 449, which isn't a big nor small number but still a rather good amount

I'm pretty sure that when I first came across this tag I searched and find explanation why it is named like this, but now I can't find it at all. Maybe I was just dreaming?

Not always, cloning would be tagged selfcest, but wouldn't really be a square crossover.

Hammie said:
Not always, cloning would be tagged selfcest, but wouldn't really be a square crossover.

Doesn't clone classify as "second version" of character?
I only know about this tag as much as it is written about it in wiki. Google gives no better results.

Gilda_The_Gryphon said:
Doesn't clone classify as "second version" of character?
I only know about this tag as much as it is written about it in wiki. Google gives no better results.

Nah, second version would be something like futashy + fluttershy

But a clone isn't the original no matter how identical it looks to the real character, therefore I think it would also count as another version of a character.

I think it's like this. Lets take Pokemon. If your are sure their can only be one of them existing. This excludes none Pokemon/animal characters... and nurse joy. Then if you see two Ash ketchum's kissing then you can say it's selfcest since there should be only one of him existing even if the other one is a clone.

Not so sure about the square crossover implementation tho. Since square crossover I interpret means that there are some difference between the two 'like' character like playing those classic fighting games. When you pick the same character they change the colour coding to make them different and that would be a square crossover and I'm not talking about ken and ryu.
post #194731
This a perfect example since it show to version of the same character fighting each other. Evil link could be like this, he is a copy of link and is created from link rather than link becoming evil. What I'm saying is a clone can be consider a square crossover in some instances, but generally to me there has to be some difference between them to warrant the tag, be it gender, clothing or some physical change like the hair style, height, weight, species or other changes.

So... Basically, square_crossover is an overly complicated and obscure term for what is essentially alternate_self?

Genjar said:
So... Basically, square_crossover is an overly complicated and obscure term for what is essentially alternate_self?

A meeting between self, and alternate self, yes.
Everything else you said is pretty much 100% accurate tho.

Genjar said:
So... Basically, square_crossover is an overly complicated and obscure term for what is essentially alternate_self?

Hammie said:
A meeting between self, and alternate self, yes.
Everything else you said is pretty much 100% accurate tho.

Does anybody ever search for or tag square_crossover?

Mario583 said:

Does anybody ever search for or tag square_crossover?

[/quote]

I can't say for sure, but I certainly don't.

nah

Another for never before seeing the square crossover term before
And wouldn't selfcest just be masturbation?

Kaiselius said:
Another for never before seeing the square crossover term before
And wouldn't selfcest just be masturbation?

That should work if your naruto.

Falord said:
That should work if your Naruto.

I loled. =^.^=

Falord said:
That should work if your naruto.

you're

Hammie said:
you're

79 6F 75 27 72 65

furballs_dc said:
79 6F 75 27 72 65

Same difference.

Hammie said:
Same difference.

3D 5E 2E 5E 3D

furballs_dc said:
3D 5E 2E 5E 3D

BINGO! I GOT BINGO! :D

I haven't seen this term for 2 years lol.

Any chance of getting this unimplicated?
It doesn't work for images such as...
post #534655
...where there's just a single character with multiple heads/personalities.

Genjar said:
Any chance of getting this unimplicated?
It doesn't work for images such as...
post #534655
...where there's just a single character with multiple heads/personalities.

Just curious, is there an official ruling on this one? Because I've always felt those should be counted as a single character regardless of how many heads or personality, if only just to give us a way to be consistent.

parasprite said:
Just curious, is there an official ruling on this one? Because I've always felt those should be counted as a single character regardless of how many heads or personality, if only just to give us a way to be consistent.

Nothing official, as far as I remember.
But counting them as a single multi-headed character (solo + 2_heads etc) seems to be the only viable method of tagging those; at least without creating new tags.