Topic: x_dominating_x implications BUR

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

The bulk update request #10829 is pending approval.

create implication female_dominating_female (396) -> dominant_female (52462)
create implication female_dominating_female (396) -> submissive_female (47835)
create implication female_dominating_male (2703) -> dominant_female (52462) # duplicate of implication #67105
create implication female_dominating_male (2703) -> submissive_male (91752)
create implication female_dominating_gynomorph (114) -> dominant_female (52462)
create implication female_dominating_gynomorph (114) -> submissive_gynomorph (1977)
create implication female_dominating_andromorph (0) -> dominant_female (52462)
create implication female_dominating_andromorph (0) -> submissive_andromorph (1034)

Reason: Logically, an x_dominating_y tag always implies that x is dominant and y is submissive. While its usage normally allows for searching for fairly specific dynamics, there are a lot of posts that either only have dominant_x, submissive_y, or - significantly more rarely - x_dominating_y, which makes it very likely that when searching for a specific dom/sub dynamic, a lot of posts slip through the cracks.
Having the x_dominating_y imply dominant_x and submissive_y would make tagging these dynamics just that much less cumbersome, and easier to find too without using a dozen tags at a time to make sure nothing slips through.

The bulk update request #10830 is pending approval.

create implication male_dominating_female (2726) -> dominant_male (64267)
create implication male_dominating_female (2726) -> submissive_female (47835)
create implication male_dominating_male (674) -> dominant_male (64267)
create implication male_dominating_male (674) -> submissive_male (91752)
create implication male_dominating_gynomorph (81) -> dominant_male (64267)
create implication male_dominating_gynomorph (81) -> submissive_gynomorph (1977)
create implication male_dominating_andromorph (40) -> dominant_male (64267)
create implication male_dominating_andromorph (40) -> submissive_andromorph (1034)

Reason: Part 2

The bulk update request #10831 is pending approval.

create implication gynomorph_dominating_female (239) -> dominant_gynomorph (6654)
create implication gynomorph_dominating_female (239) -> submissive_female (47835)
create implication gynomorph_dominating_male (207) -> dominant_gynomorph (6654)
create implication gynomorph_dominating_male (207) -> submissive_male (91752)
create implication gynomorph_dominating_gynomorph (65) -> dominant_gynomorph (6654)
create implication gynomorph_dominating_gynomorph (65) -> submissive_gynomorph (1977)
create implication gynomorph_dominating_andromorph (2) -> dominant_gynomorph (6654)
create implication gynomorph_dominating_andromorph (2) -> submissive_andromorph (1034)

Reason: part 3

The bulk update request #10832 has been rejected.

create implication andromorph_dominating_female (0) -> dominant_andromorph (338)
create implication andromorph_dominating_female (0) -> submissive_female (47835)
create implication andromorph_dominating_male (0) -> dominant_andromorph (338)
create implication andromorph_dominating_male (0) -> submissive_male (91752)
create implication andromorph_dominating_gynomorph (2) -> dominant_andromorph (338)
create implication andromorph_dominating_gynomorph (2) -> submissive_gynomorph (1977)
create implication andromorph_dominating_andromorph (1) -> dominant_andromorph (338)
create implication andromorph_dominating_andromorph (1) -> submissive_andromorph (1034)
create implication andromorph_dominating_herm (0) -> dominant_andromorph (338)
create implication andromorph_dominating_herm (0) -> submissive_herm (310)
create implication andromorph_dominating_maleherm (0) -> dominant_andromorph (338)
create implication andromorph_dominating_maleherm (0) -> submissive_maleherm (51)

Reason: part 4

EDIT: The bulk update request #10832 (forum #444829) has been rejected by @haroga.

Updated by auto moderator

The bulk update request #10833 has been rejected.

create implication herm_dominating_female (15) -> dominant_herm (464)
create implication herm_dominating_female (15) -> submissive_female (47835)
create implication herm_dominating_male (4) -> dominant_herm (464)
create implication herm_dominating_male (4) -> submissive_male (91752)
create implication herm_dominating_gynomorph (1) -> dominant_herm (464)
create implication herm_dominating_gynomorph (1) -> submissive_gynomorph (1977)
create implication herm_dominating_andromorph (0) -> dominant_herm (464)
create implication herm_dominating_andromorph (0) -> submissive_andromorph (1034)
create implication herm_dominating_herm (6) -> dominant_herm (464)
create implication herm_dominating_herm (6) -> submissive_herm (310)
create implication herm_dominating_maleherm (0) -> dominant_herm (464)
create implication herm_dominating_maleherm (0) -> submissive_maleherm (51)

Reason: part 5

EDIT: The bulk update request #10833 (forum #444830) has been rejected by @haroga.

Updated by auto moderator

The bulk update request #10834 has been rejected.

create implication maleherm_dominating_female (0) -> dominant_maleherm (30)
create implication maleherm_dominating_female (0) -> submissive_female (47835)
create implication maleherm_dominating_male (0) -> dominant_maleherm (30)
create implication maleherm_dominating_male (0) -> submissive_male (91752)
create implication maleherm_dominating_gynomorph (0) -> dominant_maleherm (30)
create implication maleherm_dominating_gynomorph (0) -> submissive_gynomorph (1977)
create implication maleherm_dominating_andromorph (0) -> dominant_maleherm (30)
create implication maleherm_dominating_andromorph (0) -> submissive_andromorph (1034)
create implication maleherm_dominating_herm (0) -> dominant_maleherm (30)
create implication maleherm_dominating_herm (0) -> submissive_herm (310)
create implication maleherm_dominating_maleherm (0) -> dominant_maleherm (30)
create implication maleherm_dominating_maleherm (0) -> submissive_maleherm (51)

Reason: part 6

EDIT: The bulk update request #10834 (forum #444831) has been rejected by @haroga.

Updated by auto moderator

Original page: https://e621.net/forum_topics/56096?page=1