The bulk update request #7766 has been rejected.

create alias what (14531) -> invalid_tag (-10)
create alias how (2) -> invalid_tag (-10)
create alias why (2680) -> invalid_tag (-10)
create alias cursed_image (593) -> invalid_tag (-10)
create alias blessed_image (20) -> invalid_tag (-10)

Reason: All these tags are extremely subjective as to when they should apply.

Tags provide no blacklist value as other tags would end up applying to the image if a user dislikes the content of it.

Tags also can be used for kink shaming.

Primonyr over on discord suggested that these be all invalidated for some of the reasons listed above.

EDIT: The bulk update request #7766 (forum #402325) has been rejected by @Yetanothertemp.

yetanothertemp said:
create alias what (14332) -> invalid_tag (4) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur
create alias why (2620) -> invalid_tag (4) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur

You'll need to remove the existing aliases and implications to the tags first before the alias can go through.

The others can go, but what is too useful to lose. Can't just wipe out a common blacklist tag like that.
If anything, get rid of the derivatives like where is your god now, instead.

On it. Will update once.i get it sorted out.

I don't know if a BUR can be edited, but here is what you can add to fix this :

create alias oh_god_why -> invalid_tag
create alias random -> invalid_tag
create alias what_the_fucking_fuck -> invalid_tag
create alias what? -> invalid_tag
create alias strange -> invalid_tag
create alias what_the_fuck -> invalid_tag
create alias dafuq -> invalid_tag
create alias what_the_shit -> invalid_tag
create alias wtf -> invalid_tag
create alias no_seriously_what -> invalid_tag
create alias wat -> invalid_tag
create alias wait_what -> invalid_tag
create alias weird -> invalid_tag
create alias what_is_this_i_don't_even -> invalid_tag
create alias what_is_this_i_dont_even -> invalid_tag
create alias what_the_christ -> invalid_tag
create alias lolwut -> invalid_tag
create alias no -> invalid_tag
create alias wut -> invalid_tag

I'd also add
create alias has_science_gone_too_far -> invalid_tag
create alias what_has_science_done -> invalid_tag
create alias god_has_abandoned_us -> invalid_tag
create alias where's_your_god_now -> invalid_tag
create alias there_is_no_god -> invalid_tag
create alias wheres_your_god_now -> invalid_tag
create alias what_in_the_unholiest_depths_of_hell -> invalid_tag
create alias where_is_your_god_now -> invalid_tag

I think that nightmare_fuel does the job well for truly unsettling content. Maybe alias some of the tags above to it instead of invalidating them ?

genjar said:
The others can go, but what is too useful to lose. Can't just wipe out a common blacklist tag like that.
If anything, get rid of the derivatives like where is your god now, instead.

Maybe by aliasing it to nightmare_fuel ? I think this is more descriptive

primonyr said:
Maybe by aliasing it to nightmare_fuel ? I think this is more descriptive

Not that nightmare fuelish, or at least that's not the intention. If it's just plain creepy without being grotesque, it shouldn't be in what in the first place.
...aliasing to grotesque could work, it's closer to that. If what were a literary genre, it'd be bizarro fiction, not horror.

In any case, not a joke tag. Its main purpose is to have a single tag for easy blacklisting of 'all that weird shit' that some users don't want to see.

The bulk update request #7766 (forum #402325) has been rejected by @Yetanothertemp.

rejected while I work on this

primonyr said:
I don't know if a BUR can be edited

Incidentally, yes they can.

genjar said:
Not that nightmare fuelish, or at least that's not the intention. If it's just plain creepy without being grotesque, it shouldn't be in what in the first place.
...aliasing to grotesque could work, it's closer to that. If what were a literary genre, it'd be bizarro fiction, not horror.

In any case, not a joke tag. Its main purpose is to have a single tag for easy blacklisting of 'all that weird shit' that some users don't want to see.

Ah, I think I see, yes. It does have 14k uses, so indeed it's not a small one

primonyr said:
Maybe by aliasing it to nightmare_fuel ? I think this is more descriptive

These are undoubtedly what, but not nightmare_fuel:

post #4609214 post #4375458 post #4108374 post #2923425 post #368717 post #3768516

There is shitpost, which what often overlaps with, which is mostly low-effort absurdist humor, but not everything in what would fit shitpost.

(Also personally I've never seen what as a negative tag, but the others come off way more negative to me. I actually like what, I think the bizarre stuff in there is amusing.)

genjar said:
Its main purpose is to have a single tag for easy blacklisting of 'all that weird shit' that some users don't want to see.

That's vague. What is the tag for in a way that isn't going to be biased from person to person? If I personally find something weird (say I find foot fetish stuff weird), can I all of a sudden tag what on it? No? Why? What is this tag's definition besides a vague collection of "weird shit" "some users" don't want to see. The wikipage doesn't help either, it's just a bunch of word soup that boils down into nothing.

The bulk update request #7767 is pending approval.

remove alias dafuq (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias random (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias strange (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias weird (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias what_is_this_i_don't_even (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias no_seriously_what (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias what? (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias what_the_fuck (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias wut (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias what_the_fucking_fuck (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias what_is_this_i_dont_even (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias lolwut (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias no (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias what_the_christ (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias what_the_shit (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias wtf (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias wat (0) -> what (14531)
remove alias wait_what (0) -> what (14531)

Reason: need to unalias all the "whats" first
more burs incoming

The bulk update request #7768 is pending approval.

create alias what (14531) -> invalid_tag (-10) # has blocking transitive relationships, cannot be applied through bur

Reason: invalidate it

donovan_dmc said:
That's vague. What is the tag for in a way that isn't going to be biased from person to person? If I personally find something weird (say I find foot fetish stuff weird), can I all of a sudden tag what on it? No? Why? What is this tag's definition besides a vague collection of "weird shit" "some users" don't want to see. The wikipage doesn't help either, it's just a bunch of word soup that boils down into nothing.

Agreed, "collection of weird shit some users don't want to see" is literally the blacklist. I could go and tag whatever I find weird with what, it's too subjective. But it might be tagged in place of grotesque maybe ? (Hence a potential alias instead of invalidation)

primonyr said:
Agreed, "collection of weird shit some users don't want to see" is literally the blacklist. I could go and tag whatever I find weird with what, it's too subjective. But it might be tagged in place of grotesque maybe ? (Hence a potential alias instead of invalidation)

I do often see what and its variants used instead of grotesque or body_horror, two tags I blacklist, which is annoying. I'm not necessarily opposed to getting rid of it, but at the same time, I don't think there's any one tag that it could be easily aliased away to.

Maybe move it to the invalid category and point towards other tags like meme, shitpost, crossover, humor, grotesque, nightmare_fuel, body_horror, etc...?

-> cat:invalid seems like it'd be a much better way to go than full invalidation.

dba_afish said:
-> cat:invalid seems like it'd be a much better way to go than full invalidation.

I think clearing it out then invalidating it would do the job just fine, no point just shoving it into the invalid category

donovan_dmc said:
I think clearing it out then invalidating it would do the job just fine, no point just shoving it into the invalid category

I mean, if the tag can be "cleaned out" that means that it holds enough meaning for it to be disambiguated, which is what invalid category is for. full invalidation is really only for stuff that has extremely minimal to zero tagging value (like r34) and a few cases of stuff better left untagged (like locked_comments).

I don't agree with invalidating what and all the variants. If the user simply doesn't like the content and tags the post with "what" then that's just a clear case of tag abuse. The whole intention of the tag is akin to a comedic aside to point out the absurdity and disturbing nature of the content being portrayed, as in not as a means to "kinkshame". If someone genuinely believes seeing a legitimate what tag is kinkshaming, it says more about them than it does about the person applying the tag.

More importantly, it helps people from looking at cursed images when they're trying to search for something awesome. Here's an example, I like macros. If I want to look up giant tree squirrels I'd use a search string like: macro anthro tree_squirrel and find an image like this:
post #1723129

With what you're proposing, I might end up with results that would otherwise get around me using what on my blacklist. And now I get an image like this?
post #1270440

Need I say more?

druss_hb said:
With what you're proposing, I might end up with results that would otherwise get around me using what on my blacklist. And now I get an image like this?
post #1270440

Need I say more?

I'd say blacklist cock_vore ? I'm sure there are people who wouldn't think "what" by seeing that. And I would personally think "what" with the top one you shared because of my tastes, does that mean I should tag it ? No. We all have different thresholds and sensitivities.
We should use the tag grotesque instead, makes more sense I think. That's why I believe an alias what -> grotesque could be relevant

primonyr said:
I'd say blacklist cock_vore ? I'm sure there are people who wouldn't think "what" by seeing that

But I like cock vore? Just not vacuum vore. Also I find it horribly inconvenient to add increasingly esoteric tags to my blacklist when simply adding

primonyr said:
And I would personally think "what" with the top one you shared because of my tastes, does that mean I should tag it ? No. We all have different thresholds and sensitivities.what is enough.

Again, if a user editing a post does that, that's tag abuse. Does that mean we have to invalidate a tag that has existed on the site for over 16 years now? A tag that I remind you that has been a part of the site since its inception in 2007?

post #25

primonyr said:
And use the tag grotesque instead, that's why I believe an alias what -> grotesque could be relevant

What does not necessarily mean grotesque. And HOO BOY here comes that problem AGAIN: Look at what I found with -grotesque what

post #78596

Yeah my other blacklist filters work and block this but this is beside the point. All I'm saying is if you put this invalidation through it will make everyone else's experience on the site that much worse.

druss_hb said:
But I like cock vore? Just not vacuum vore. Also I find it horribly inconvenient to add increasingly esoteric tags to my blacklist when simply adding what is enough.

I don't think there's anything wrong with having a long blacklist, mine is very long. But that might just be me who's ok with that
what might include things you might otherwise want to see, it's too vague. At this point it might as well be the content of the default blacklist

druss_hb said:
What does not necessarily mean grotesque. And HOO BOY here comes that problem AGAIN: Look at what I found with -grotesque what

post #78596

Yeah my other blacklist filters work and block this but this is beside the point. All I'm saying is if you put this invalidation through it will make everyone else's experience on the site that much worse.

There again, blacklist feces related tags (I believe the default blacklist has them)

primonyr said:
I don't think there's anything wrong with having a long blacklist, mine is very long. But that might just be me who's ok with that
what might include things you might otherwise want to see, it's too vague.

If I'm a brave enough boy I might turn them off. Or I might not. Re621 has a neat feature that allows users to selectively enable or disable blacklist filters individually.

This sounds like the same argument that was presented to not invalidate disabled_comments. A tag which would encompass multiple topics and serve no single purpose for blacklisting. In the same vein, what is subjective enough to both overblock and underblock.

donovan_dmc said:
This sounds like the same argument that was presented to not invalidate disabled_comments. A tag which would encompass multiple topics and serve no single purpose for blacklisting. In the same vein, what is subjective enough to both overblock and underblock.

Not exactly. If I don't want to look at horribly cursed images, currently that option is available to me. In your example referring to preventing users from finding offensive content, you correctly assert here that blacklisting disabled_comments would have only hidden a single image from your data set. That's not the case here. All too often when I'm looking through an artist's gallery there's usually something that said artist has drawn that I would prefer to forget, and correctly tagged whats helps in that regard - PROVIDED that they are tagged appropiately when it is necessary.

I'm going to summarize my points in this post so they're not all spread out over multiple replies:

• The tag has been in active use since e621's inception in 2007.
• If a user tags a post with what just because they don't like the content, it's clear tag abuse.
• The tag's purpose is to humorously highlight the absurd or disturbing nature of the content, not to "kinkshame."
• Adding numerous esoteric tags to a blacklist is inconvenient when just adding "what" filter would solve most issues.
• Advanced blacklisting, such as that in Re621, enables users to toggle blacklist filters individually, preventing users from missing content they may otherwise enjoy.

I think that covers everything I've said.

druss_hb said:

• The tag has been in active use since e621's inception in 2007.

A tag's age is not an argument point for keeping or invalidating.

druss_hb said:

• If a user tags a post with what just because they don't like the content, it's clear tag abuse.

But where does "not liking the content" end and "what" begin? This tag has no clear definition, and no beginning or end.

druss_hb said:
Adding numerous esoteric tags to a blacklist is inconvenient when just adding "what" filter would solve most issues.

I'd call picking one tag that covers a wide variety of topics with no clear bounds infinitely worse than picking and choosing what you actually want to blacklist.

druss_hb said:

• Advanced blacklisting, such as that in Re621, enables users to toggle blacklist filters individually, preventing users from missing content they may otherwise enjoy.

The majority of users have no idea re621 exists.

There are clearly redundant variations that could be merged but I don't understand the argument for blanket removal. There is clearly a theme not covered by any other tag and I've clicked it a number of times and seen exactly what I was searching for: weird, inexplicable, shitposty or bizarre art. I agree, it's not useful for blacklisting because it's not specific enough... but it would be a loss for search to not have it. Deleting it without making any effort to preserve that value would be borderline vandalism.

arrow189 said:
There are clearly redundant variations that could be merged but I don't understand the argument for blanket removal. There is clearly a theme not covered by any other tag and I've clicked it a number of times and seen exactly what I was searching for: weird, inexplicable, shitposty or bizarre art. I agree, it's not useful for blacklisting because it's not specific enough... but it would be a loss for search to not have it. Deleting it without making any effort to preserve that value would be borderline vandalism.

There are other tags that most of the content under what cover, though. For example, you mention "weird shitposty art"... shitpost is an existing tag on its own that would be more accurate for finding that type of content. What is also often applied to things instead of more appropriate tags like horror_(theme) or nightmare_fuel or grotesque or body_horror. Often what gets tagged on things for just featuring someone from the real_world or being a crossover.

I could keep going.

Also what order:score -meme -humor is mostly just weird kinks.

donovan_dmc said:
But where does "not liking the content" end and "what" begin? This tag has no clear definition, and no beginning or end.

I would argue discerning between what and not is rather easy. Take the macro sandy post for example. Now take literally any other post with the macro tag and ask "is this picture I'm looking at more or less unsettling than macro sandy with a vacuum dick? Does it have a threatening aura like that one picture of Hunter taking a massive dump in a subway footlong? And if you have answered yes to both these questions so far than ask yourself you would you feel like you're committing a war crime by knocking one out to this."

I'm joking obviously but you get my point. If anything I'd be in favour of starting a project to comb through the what tags and redefine them, I agree its poorly defined and i think it's most likely the product of over several years of people just tag abusing.

This is one of those things some people may intuitively understand and others never will. The people who have trouble seeing the common thread want it gone.

what is basically a user's reaction to a post, like a shortened form of "what is this, I don't even" or "what the hell." "I don't get it." Any HUH farmers out there or perhaps those who enjoy getting their HUHs farmed? This is your tag. I believe what is a stock response that makes sense to more people who were in certain cultural Internet scenes around 2010, including and perhaps especially e621 (we are normies' source of weird shit).

And why is like the shortened form of "why does this exist" or "why even (make this)". I've felt that what, why, and what + why were appropriate reactions to different posts.

The larger issue with these tags is we may viscerally understand when a post deserves these tags but knowing when we should remove them is much more challenging because that'd invalidate someone else's reaction, assuming the tag was added in good faith, both of which are unknowable.

Also, "just move the posts somewhere else" is a casual suggestion tossed out right before passing the buck to somebody else. Have you tried? You guys aren't the tenth or even twentieth people to have suggested this. If it were that easy, I don't think this would be a thread.

These are "weird shit" posts. In theory, they are the cream of the crop for weirdness. They are, as we say in 2024 (still?), extra. If you remove the tags roping them together, then how can these posts be identified and blacklisted? This tag apparently identifies blacklist bait.

Probably a lot of these posts are literally reaction bait, others are intentionally provocative shitposts, and some are warped but completely serious artistic expression.

Aww some of my favorite tags are in the what/why family. I don't have any argument for keeping them other than I think they're fun. I like seeing odd stuff that confuses me. Unintentional body horror, unsettling character reactions, things that are just a bit too earnest to be shitposts. I don't think it's useful for blacklisting as much as just a funky museum of how inventive human sexuality can be.

If we were to remove the tag, let's take post #1270440 into consideration again. Since I'm okay with most kinds of vore and DON'T have that blacklisted, I would have to blacklist vacuum penis and vacuum vore, two very specific, esoteric, satellite tags that are not very populated. Hooray! I've successfully prevented a total of 105 posts from shining deadly light into my retinas. AKA: I've prevented myself from seeing approximately 0.0025% of the gallery that can be considered 'cursed'. I might include gaping urethra but still only a grand total of 643 posts, that's still a drop in the ocean for what I might want to consider blacklisting.

abadbird said:
*snip*

+1

Also let's not ignore the comedic flavour of "what". One day I might blacklist what, one day I might turn it off just to intentionally find weirdness and shitposts.

One of the biggest takeaways I want from my defence is this: One's individual opinion of what constitutes the what tag is irrelevant. However, the gross consensus of what most users would define as an image where one might say "what the fuck am I even looking at" does constitute in the tags application. You say the age of the tag is irrelevant and I say you can't be more wrong, because it is undeniably part of the sites identity.