Hello everyone, I have been working on tagging power_bottom and service_top posts recently. I noticed that there is an influx of images where the tags were added but no such power dynamic was visible. I want to request that we add the two tags mentioned to have a clean separation where its a lore thing and where its actually in the image, because it seems like the uploaders know that the character is a power_bottom/service_top or its described in the images description/texts, but it isn't actually happening in the image.

See posts:
post #5200123 post #5166905 post #5132855

I also already created some basic wiki pages to describe the tags further and a see also section:

power_bottom_(lore)
service_top_(lore)

I don't think lore tags are necessary for this. It comes across as describing a character's desires or profession without visible traits, along the lines of wanting to tag submissive for a character that wants the D, but is otherwise not restrained or dominated in any way. Lore tags should serve a purpose beyond being something someone wants to tag their character with that doesn't fit TWYS.

The lore category is not just a dumping ground for anything that isn't strictly TWYS, these definitely do not ft in

You should have used topic #23515 to propose new lore tags, but these will certainly not be implemented because that is not how lore tags are used.

With the exception of the family relation tags, lore tags are mostly used when information tagged on the post is canonically wrong and a clarification is needed.
This means for every power_bottom_(lore) & service_top_(lore) tagged, you need the opposite service_top & power_bottom to also be tagged respectively.
They cannot exist by their own and we don't automatically tag them because the characters are known to behave as such by default.

service_top is weird since the e6 wiki definition is different than the definition that comes up when googling the term. But I'm not familiar with the lingo in the sex having community.

dinbyy said:
service_top is weird since the e6 wiki definition is different than the definition that comes up when googling the term. But I'm not familiar with the lingo in the sex having community.

And do we really need a service_top tag with the way it seems to be used?

thegreatwolfgang said:
You should have used topic #23515 to propose new lore tags, but these will certainly not be implemented because that is not how lore tags are used.

My bad I will keep that in mind next time

thegreatwolfgang said:
With the exception of the family relation tags, lore tags are mostly used when information tagged on the post is canonically wrong and a clarification is needed.
This means for every power_bottom_(lore) & service_top_(lore) tagged, you need the opposite service_top & power_bottom to also be tagged respectively.
They cannot exist by their own and we don't automatically tag them because the characters are known to behave as such by default.

Okay. I have one more question then. How would you tag smth like this?

post #5199815

I would remove the tag at this point because there doesn't seem to be any action implying that the bottom is dominant. But you could argue the facial expression might make it seem so? But he also could be just really enjoying himself.

I personally would stick to physical implications like restricting movement or ordering the top around.

dinbyy said:
And do we really need a service_top tag with the way it seems to be used?

The definition seems completely fine to me. There is kinda no point in removing it since it's the counter part to power_bottom and I assume since I use that tag there is people who also want the service_top tag.

I run a Telegram channel dedicated for that type of power dynamic with around 400 users and I am currently running a poll to see how many people actually use service_top on here. I think its worth keeping nonetheless.

pixelhunter said:
Okay. I have one more question then. How would you tag smth like this?

post #5199815

I'd be wary of inferring any power dynamics from facial expressions, especially if it involves a first_person_view of a character as it will be interpreted subjectively based on the viewer's desires. In my mind, there's nothing saying the FPV character isn't giving off an equally or more-so aggressive expression and is actually the one in control, but many people will see the FPV character as all subby and "conquered" because that's how they want to feel as the viewer, and assign a meek role to the FPV character despite no visual indication of it.