Topic: Tag Alias: huge_penetration -> tight_fit

Aliasing huge_penetration → tight_fit
Link to alias

Reason:

I'm not sure if this is redundant to tight_fit or ridiculous_fit, tbh, but it seems to clearly be meant to be the same as one or both these two, except restricted to penetration.

I think it's their attempt at being parallel to large_insertion, huge_insertion, and extreme_insertion. These have never really been very tidy but I can't think of anything that would work better. This is one of those cases where it is only tagged when it's large enough to be notable which is really hard to define. The insertion tags seem to be doing a bit better at least...

I guess the debate is whether we need both a set of *_fit (tight_fit and ridiculous_fit) and full sets of [size]_insertion/penetration tags, then? I mean, I think it can be agreed that there is no need for both.

The tight/ridiculous fit seems far more clear to me than large/huge/extreme insertion, if only because large/huge/hyper penis does not really correlate to the penetration tags because those depends on the sub's size, not the penis size.

Yer in furry land now, son.

post #577359

Huge ≠ tight.

SirAntagonist said:
Yer in furry land now, son.

post #577359

Huge ≠ tight.

Anything that involve a belly_bulge would get instant ridiculous_fit tagging from me :P.

I can't tell if you think the two/three tagging schemes should all exist or not though.

Circeus said:
Anything that involve a belly_bulge would get instant ridiculous_fit tagging from me :P.

I can't tell if you think the two/three tagging schemes should all exist or not though.

Tight fit should be used when it's exactly that. Ridiculous_fit should only be used when the insertion's absurdly large.

You can have something be tight, but not ridiculous, and you can have a fit be ridiculous, but not tight.

SirAntagonist said:
Tight fit should be used when it's exactly that. Ridiculous_fit should only be used when the insertion's absurdly large.

You can have something be tight, but not ridiculous, and you can have a fit be ridiculous, but not tight.

tight_fit just means the step below ridiculous_fit (roughly at the limit of realism), not the opposite of an inexistent loose_fit. My point is whether something should have both a (say) huge_penetration/insertion and ridiculous_fit tag (especially since there might already be a huge_penis tag in there too!)

I'm -1 on the alias

I think that the two have different connotations despite being closely related.
Edit: for example, it's not unbelievabe in this community for a character to be taking a ridiculously huge cock/toy, but comment in the image something like "Meh, doesn't even feel like a stretch anymore"

Tokaido said:
I'm -1 on the alias

I think that the two have different connotations despite being closely related.
Edit: for example, it's not unbelievabe in this community for a character to be taking a ridiculously huge cock/toy, but comment in the image something like "Meh, doesn't even feel like a stretch anymore"

Would that not be covered by huge_insertion/huge_penis? I suppose if it's a micro case I'd end up using ridiculous_fit + size_difference, but it's hard to say without seeing a picture in front of me.

parasprite said:
Would that not be covered by huge_insertion/huge_penis? I suppose if it's a micro case I'd end up using ridiculous_fit + size_difference, but it's hard to say without seeing a picture in front of me.

I don't care what the character says. If it's clearly a ridiculous_fit, it's a ridiculous fit even if the character think it's loose.

Circeus said:
I don't care what the character says. If it's clearly a ridiculous_fit, it's a ridiculous fit even if the character think it's loose.

+1 to this.

Circeus said:
tight_fit just means the step below ridiculous_fit (roughly at the limit of realism), not the opposite of an inexistent loose_fit. My point is whether something should have both a (say) huge_penetration/insertion and ridiculous_fit tag (especially since there might already be a huge_penis tag in there too!)

It doesn't matter. You can have tight_fit without ridiculous_penetration or huge_penetration.

The same way you can have abdominal_bulge without ridiculous_fit.

Still a -1 from me.

It doesn't seem like there was much of a conclusion on this one besides them not being the same thing. I don't know about usage differences here, but I went ahead and made the following changes:

• Alias: huge_penetration -> tight_fit (denied)
• Implication: huge_penetration -> penetration (approved)

We can discuss aliasing huge_penetration to something else if need be, but I don't think tight_fit is a good enough match to justify it at this point.