Aliasing ankles_tied -> bound.

Reason: Don't need another tag that means the same thing

They're not really the same though. Ankles_tied is the location of what's being bound, while bound is the broad concept. I could see this as an implication though. Especially since arms_tied is already implicated to bound. But tags like this are needed to make bondage and bound more usable as tags, since they're entirely too broad otherwise. I don't think doing away with it is a good idea. Implicating them though, that would be useful.

furrypickle said:
They're not really the same though. Ankles_tied is the location of what's being bound, while bound is the broad concept. I could see this as an implication though. Especially since arms_tied is already implicated to bound. But tags like this are needed to make bondage and bound more usable as tags, since they're entirely too broad otherwise. I don't think doing away with it is a good idea. Implicating them though, that would be useful.

agreed

An implication would be better

perhaps each should also add bondage?
maybe just replace bound with bondage?

speks said:
perhaps each should also add bondage?
maybe just replace bound with bondage?

Bondage is a general term for restraint. Bound is a specific term for things being tied together.

so where does restrained fit in with all this?

Someone who is being held down physically by others is restrained but not in bondage.

Azazial said:
Someone who is being held down physically by others is restrained but not in bondage.

Agreed.

Also agreed with the implication, not the alias.

Azazial said:
Someone who is being held down physically by others is restrained but not in bondage.

so if someone's in cuffs then they aren't restrained?

ippiki_ookami said:
so if someone's in cuffs then they aren't restrained?

if you're bound you're also restrained but if you're restrained you aren't always bound, so its simpler to have separate bound and restrained tags, with restrained meaning held back without being bound. Also I feel like bound_feet would be better because ankles_tied sounds bad and it would fit in better with being implied to bound.

Damnit I've said bound so much in my head the word sounds weird now.

Sollux said:
Damnit I've said bound so much in my head the word sounds weird now.

I HATE that! Like "kid" and "kids". Use "kids" too much and it'll start looking like one word.

I think we're using the definition, "To hold back or keep in check; control" rather than using it synonymously with "to bind", specifically.

It's called semantic saturation.

Wyvrn said:
It's called semantic saturation.

Yup! Always found it interesting. Used to erroneously refer to it as Semantic Satiation, lol. Coulda sworn I talked about it here on the forums, but searching for it returns nothing. Huh.

123easy said:
Used to erroneously refer to it as Semantic Satiation, lol.

Erroneously?

ippiki_ookami said:
so if someone's in cuffs then they aren't restrained?

u trollin

Snowy said:
Erroneously?

huh, thought I was using the term erroneously! Thanks for the information.

Whoa, I totally forgot that I made this thread :I