reason:

The idea of cum inflation kind of demands that the abdomen distends. There are hundreds of cum_inflation posts without abdominal bulge, and they should all be tagged with the latter as well as the former. I have yet to see a single exception.

The wiki will need a revamp if this goes through; currently, "While the term could mean several different things, in the context of this site it refers to the following:

The bulge in a portrayed character's lower (or occasionally upper) abdomen created by a penis, tentacle, or other object penetrating that character."

Personally, i'd just keep cum_inflation and its implication inflation separate from abdominal_bulge and not change the wiki. They seem to be denoting two separate fetishes, one where the belly is distended due to inflation (covered by inflation) and one in where the abdomen is distended due to something penetrating an orifice deeply enough that it causes the abdomen to bulge; An example of the latter would be John K. Peta's art, while the former would be post #413462 , and both would be post #408378

At this point its usability vs accuracy, if I want to see cum inflation or any Inflation they're already general enough of a search, but abdominal bulge is a whole different pancake, even if inflation does mean an abdominal bulge, it doesn't really suit tagging purposes.

Sollux said:
At this point its usability vs accuracy, if I want to see cum inflation or any Inflation they're already general enough of a search, but abdominal bulge is a whole different pancake, even if inflation does mean an abdominal bulge, it doesn't really suit tagging purposes.

It'd be nice to have it be implied by inflation and have a separate tag for what currently is abdominal bulge, honestly. Feels... wrong, as it stands.

Sollux said:
At this point its usability vs accuracy, if I want to see cum inflation or any Inflation they're already general enough of a search, but abdominal bulge is a whole different pancake, even if inflation does mean an abdominal bulge, it doesn't really suit tagging purposes.

If I search abdominal_bulge I wouldn't be seeing at least 1000 images that should be tagged with it. The point I'm getting at is this: Abdominal_bulge should mean, well, an abdominal bulge. If there's any distension in the abdomen, it's a bulge, regardless whether or not it's cum or an object creating the bulge.

123easy said:
The wiki will need a revamp if this goes through; currently, "While the term could mean several different things, in the context of this site it refers to the following:

The bulge in a portrayed character's lower (or occasionally upper) abdomen created by a penis, tentacle, or other object penetrating that character."

Personally, i'd just keep cum_inflation and its implication inflation separate from abdominal_bulge and not change the wiki. They seem to be denoting two separate fetishes, one where the belly is distended due to inflation (covered by inflation) and one in where the abdomen is distended due to something penetrating an orifice deeply enough that it causes the abdomen to bulge; An example of the latter would be John K. Peta's art, while the former would be post #413462 , and both would be post #408378

Just because the wiki says something doesn't mean we can't change it. Now that i look at it, the wiki article should be revamped to have abdominal bulge include cum_inflation. Some weird, arcane way of separating fetishes isn't doing anyone any good. Besides, if you only wanted to see objects creating an abdominal bulge, you could just search abdominal_bulge -cum_inflation.

As a side, this wouldn't affect the inflation implication. It would just make it so that cum_inflation implies both inflation and abdominal_bulge.

The thing is is you could just separately search for inflation if you want that, otherwise people who search for penis or tentacle bulges would have to either wade through or blacklist the inflation, like I was saying, usability over total accuracy at this point.

Sollux said:
The thing is is you could just separately search for inflation if you want that, otherwise people who search for penis or tentacle bulges would have to either wade through or blacklist the inflation, like I was saying, usability over total accuracy at this point.

Then there should be a tag for penetration_bulge or something. Why are we not tagging things just because some people may prefer it over something else? The point of tagging is to create an accurate visual representation of the picture, making it easier to search. This implication would add hundreds of images to the abdominal_bulge tag. Should we not have tentacle_rape imply rape, because some people might not want to see tentacles when they search for rape?

You also neglect to mention that there are TONS of pictures tagged wrongly by this standard. Plenty of abdominal bulge pictures are purely inflation.

SirAntagonist said:
If I search abdominal_bulge I wouldn't be seeing at least 1000 images that should be tagged with it. The point I'm getting at is this: Abdominal_bulge should mean, well, an abdominal bulge. If there's any distension in the abdomen, it's a bulge, regardless whether or not it's cum or an object creating the bulge.

Just because the wiki says something doesn't mean we can't change it. Now that i look at it, the wiki article should be revamped to have abdominal bulge include cum_inflation. Some weird, arcane way of separating fetishes isn't doing anyone any good. Besides, if you only wanted to see objects creating an abdominal bulge, you could just search abdominal_bulge -cum_inflation.

As a side, this wouldn't affect the inflation implication. It would just make it so that cum_inflation implies both inflation and abdominal_bulge.

Which is why I stated that I'd prefer in the long run to change the tag and giving what the current abdominal_bulge tag means to a different tag, and have it imply abdominal_bulge as cum_inflation should. The fetishes SHOULD be separated, though they are related.

SirAntagonist said:
Then there should be a tag for penetration_bulge or something. Why are we not tagging things just because some people may prefer it over something else? The point of tagging is to create an accurate visual representation of the picture, making it easier to search. This implication would add hundreds of images to the abdominal_bulge tag. Should we not have tentacle_rape imply rape, because some people might not want to see tentacles when they search for rape?

You also neglect to mention that there are TONS of pictures tagged wrongly by this standard. Plenty of abdominal bulge pictures are purely inflation.

I could stand by a separate tag like penetration_bulge although it sounds a bit off. It does fit purposes well.

123easy said:
Which is why I stated that I'd prefer in the long run to change the tag and giving what the current abdominal_bulge tag means to a different tag, and have it imply abdominal_bulge as cum_inflation should. The fetishes SHOULD be separated, though they are related.

The fetishes CAN be separated. (for the most part) abdominal_bulge -Cum_inflation

And the implication I suggested isn't dealing with the two fetishes. It's trying to correct a gap in a descriptive tag. As much as one hates to admit it, cum_inflation creates and abdominal_bulge. There's no debate.

We should probably implicate abdominal_bulge to pregnant as well then.

SirAntagonist said:
Then there should be a tag for penetration_bulge or something. Why are we not tagging things just because some people may prefer it over something else? The point of tagging is to create an accurate visual representation of the picture, making it easier to search. This implication would add hundreds of images to the abdominal_bulge tag. Should we not have tentacle_rape imply rape, because some people might not want to see tentacles when they search for rape?

You also neglect to mention that there are TONS of pictures tagged wrongly by this standard. Plenty of abdominal bulge pictures are purely inflation.

Thats a great tag name to replace how the current abdominal_bulge is being used! Anything tagged abdominal_bulge and cum_inflation currently should have it untagged, then it should be aliased to penetration_bulge, and then un-aliased so penetration_bulge and all the various inflation tags can be implicated to it; I'm sure there's other tags like pregnancy that can also imply it as well.

EDIT: Adding this here rather than new post so as to prevent double-posting.

SirAntagonist said:
The fetishes CAN be separated. (for the most part) abdominal_bulge -Cum_inflation

And the implication I suggested isn't dealing with the two fetishes. It's trying to correct a gap in a descriptive tag. As much as you hate to admit it, cum_inflation creates and abdominal_bulge. There's no debate.

I've never debated it doesn't. Only that penetrative bulges are a separate fetish from inflation bulges and should be kept separate, and as I detailed above should work just fine for that purpose.

SirAntagonist said:
... There's no debate.

Rude.
There's always a debate.
The tag as currently used does not fit your suggestion.
So, the debate is: Do we change current usage for the purpose of this alias? Or Carry on using the tag as is?

Halite said:
We should probably implicate abdominal_bulge to pregnant as well then.

Good point, but a bulge doesn't start to show until about the 2nd trimester. Early pregnancy doesn't show at all.

123easy said:
Thats a great tag name to replace how the current abdominal_bulge is being used! Anything tagged abdominal_bulge and cum_inflation currently should have it untagged, then it should be aliased to penetration_bulge, and then un-aliased so penetration_bulge and all the various inflation tags can be implicated to it; I'm sure there's other tags like pregnancy that can also imply it as well.

Yeesh. That sounds like there could be certain pockets of posts missing tags if we did that, though.

We could go through the pictures tagged with abdominal_bulge, delete the tag from the inflation pics, alias abdominal_bulge to penetration_bulge, and THEN have both penetration_bulge and cum_inflation inply abdominal_bulge.

This could take some time...

EDIT: Shit. If we did that, though, pictures that were cum_inflation and penetration_bulge tagged would be left without one of the tags.

EDIT EDIT: Actually, it could work if we only eliminated the abdominal_bulge tags from the pictures that were exclusively inflation.

Halite said:
Rude.
There's always a debate.
The tag as currently used does not fit your suggestion.
So, the debate is: Do we change current usage for the purpose of this alias? Or Carry on using the tag as is?

123easy said:
I've never debated it doesn't. Only that penetrative bulges are a separate fetish from inflation bulges and should be kept separate, and as I detailed above should work just fine for that purpose.

You misunderstood me. When I said "No debate" I meant that there's no debate about whether or not a cum inflated belly has an abdominal bulge. It's an inherent attribute.

I also vote using penetration_bulge and Implying it along with pregnant and cum_inflation all to abdominal bulge.

SirAntagonist said:
EDIT EDIT: Actually, it could work if we only eliminated the abdominal_bulge tags from the pictures that were exclusively inflation.

That's what I was suggesting when I said to untag abdominal_bulge from anything tagged abdominal_bulge and cum_inflation; In short, make it so nothing that is going to be implying it later is tagged as it, so that it can be cleanly aliased and then de-aliased so all the posts simply get transferred from one tag to another.

123easy said:
That's what I was suggesting when I said to untag abdominal_bulge from anything tagged abdominal_bulge and cum_inflation; In short, make it so nothing that is going to be implying it later is tagged as it, so that it can be cleanly aliased and then de-aliased so all the posts simply get transferred from one tag to another.

Makes sense.

I'll gladly help with the tag nuking if an admin or mod gives the go-ahead for this idea.