Now Viewing: Subjective Tagging Discussion
Keep it civil, do not flame or bait other users. If you notice anything illegal or inappropriate being discussed, contact an administrator or moderator.
Quote
Posted on: 07/01/11 08:25AM
internetlovemachine said:
No, creating and using tags for nothing more than personal feeling is bad. Tagging is something that needs to be kept as objective as possible, and it very few exceptions to show that.
On the contrary however, pointing out that you are an imbecile is perfectly fine.
No, creating and using tags for nothing more than personal feeling is bad. Tagging is something that needs to be kept as objective as possible, and it very few exceptions to show that.
On the contrary however, pointing out that you are an imbecile is perfectly fine.
I actually feel no inclination to call you an imbecile. (Though I invite anyone with a sense of irony to read the bolded.)
Creating tags to express personal feeling(s) is bad, yes. However, some observations involving aesthetic values can be shared by a significant portion of the community. It's because of this that I believe there should be relative tolerance for subjective tags.
EDIT: Wouldn't calling users stupid or imbeciles fall under this "flame or bait other users" bit of litigation mentioned at the top of this very page, Moderator in Training?
Posted on: 07/01/11 08:37AM
Usagi said:
I actually feel no inclination to call you an imbecile. (Though I invite anyone with a sense of irony to read the bolded.)
I actually feel no inclination to call you an imbecile. (Though I invite anyone with a sense of irony to read the bolded.)
Yeah because people that make typos are totally retarded am I right?
Usagi said:
However, some observations involving aesthetic values can be shared by a significant portion of the community. It's because of this that I believe there should be relative tolerance for subjective tags.
However, some observations involving aesthetic values can be shared by a significant portion of the community. It's because of this that I believe there should be relative tolerance for subjective tags.
If an an inch is given a mile will be taken. Not that I agree with that anyway.
Also since I'm commenting anyway, re:your first comment, you are awful at sarcasm.
Posted on: 07/01/11 08:45AM
ShadowbladeEdge said:
Yeah because people that make typos are totally retarded am I right?
Yeah because people that make typos are totally retarded am I right?
Not really, but if someone is going to call me an imbecile, they can at least self-edit.
ShadowbladeEdge said:
If an an inch is given a mile will be taken.
If an an inch is given a mile will be taken.
I'll give you this.
ShadowbladeEdge said:
Also since I'm commenting anyway, re: your first comment you are awful at sarcasm.
Also since I'm commenting anyway, re: your first comment you are awful at sarcasm.
Perhaps it's time I drop every dramatic device and give this "objective" thing a try.
Posted on: 07/01/11 08:50AM
I'll ignore the typo part because
well I really want to say "because fuck you" but I can't now that you did the flamebaiting argument
(my mind supplemented the 'has' for what its worth)
Pools
Pools
Pools
POOLS
gelbooru.com/index.php?page=pool&s=list
Help make people learn these fucking things exist.
If you make a cute pool that gains traction it'll just become another broken shitfest for anything a user even remotely likes but at least it'll be the right place for it.
It'd be the most polite(or would the right word be "gentlemanly"?) flame-baiting in human history, but sure. You go for that.
Meanwhile, I'll just click the "moderator in training" pedometer to a zillion...
EDIT: I somehow missed out on a quote tag there.
I pointed it out for you after I fixed it like this so you had ammo.
You horses ass.
well I really want to say "because fuck you" but I can't now that you did the flamebaiting argument
(my mind supplemented the 'has' for what its worth)
Usagi said:
Creating tags to express personal feeling(s) is bad, yes. However, some observations involving aesthetic values can be shared by a significant portion of the community. It's because of this that I believe there should be relative tolerance for subjective tags.
Creating tags to express personal feeling(s) is bad, yes. However, some observations involving aesthetic values can be shared by a significant portion of the community. It's because of this that I believe there should be relative tolerance for subjective tags.
Pools
Pools
Pools
POOLS
gelbooru.com/index.php?page=pool&s=list
Help make people learn these fucking things exist.
If you make a cute pool that gains traction it'll just become another broken shitfest for anything a user even remotely likes but at least it'll be the right place for it.
EDIT: Wouldn't calling users stupid or imbeciles fall under this "flame or bait other users" bit of litigation mentioned at the top of this very page, Moderator in Training?
It'd be the most polite(or would the right word be "gentlemanly"?) flame-baiting in human history, but sure. You go for that.
Meanwhile, I'll just click the "moderator in training" pedometer to a zillion...
EDIT: I somehow missed out on a quote tag there.
I pointed it out for you after I fixed it like this so you had ammo.
You horses ass.
Posted on: 07/01/11 09:01AM
internetlovemachine said:
If you make a cute pool that gains traction it'll just become another broken shitfest for anything a user even remotely likes but at least it'll be the right place for it.
If you make a cute pool that gains traction it'll just become another broken shitfest for anything a user even remotely likes but at least it'll be the right place for it.
This sounds so familiar.
The joke is this is exactly what has happened with Danbooru's cute pool.
Posted on: 07/01/11 09:08AM
ShadowbladeEdge said:
This sounds so familiar.
The joke is this is exactly what has happened with Danbooru's cute pool.
This sounds so familiar.
The joke is this is exactly what has happened with Danbooru's cute pool.
At least nobody has removed the Meowth image lately.
Posted on: 07/01/11 09:20AM
I asked this a page ago and still have'nt got an answer.
ear types > just plain "ears"? (guessing yes)
hair colors > just plain "hair"? (guessing yes)
should the "ears" tag be removed unless it's the focus of a picture? (?)
ear types > just plain "ears"? (guessing yes)
hair colors > just plain "hair"? (guessing yes)
should the "ears" tag be removed unless it's the focus of a picture? (?)
Posted on: 07/01/11 09:21AM
Right.
Ears: I'd use "Ears" if they're normal human ears and at the very least, easily noticeable in the image.
If it's for non-human ears, use "animal_ears" and whatever applicable tag for what ears they are. Bunny_ears, cat_ears, etc.
If a character has animal ears and a normal human set of ears(pointy ears can take the place of human ears), use "extra_ears".
As for plain "hair", Danbooru's wiki suggests "This tag should only be used when there is loose hair in the picture.", which I assume means images like danbooru.donmai.us/post/show/82643/ where there is
well
Loose hair.
That tag doesn't seem to be following it's own rules for the most part there, though. I'll take care of that.
Ears: I'd use "Ears" if they're normal human ears and at the very least, easily noticeable in the image.
If it's for non-human ears, use "animal_ears" and whatever applicable tag for what ears they are. Bunny_ears, cat_ears, etc.
If a character has animal ears and a normal human set of ears(pointy ears can take the place of human ears), use "extra_ears".
As for plain "hair", Danbooru's wiki suggests "This tag should only be used when there is loose hair in the picture.", which I assume means images like danbooru.donmai.us/post/show/82643/ where there is
well
Loose hair.
That tag doesn't seem to be following it's own rules for the most part there, though. I'll take care of that.
Posted on: 07/01/11 12:37PM
A few questions about those "cum_on" tags:
"cum_on_fingers" -> "cum_in_hand", "cum_on_shoes/shirt/skirt/dress" -> "cum_on_clothes", "cum_on_chin/eye/lips" -> "Facial". Are all of those correct?
Also, what does one do in the case of objects? (Like bed, wall, desk, chair, leek, book and so on)
"cum_on_fingers" -> "cum_in_hand", "cum_on_shoes/shirt/skirt/dress" -> "cum_on_clothes", "cum_on_chin/eye/lips" -> "Facial". Are all of those correct?
Also, what does one do in the case of objects? (Like bed, wall, desk, chair, leek, book and so on)
Posted on: 07/01/11 12:52PM
Just ask yourself: Would anyone specifically search for "cum_on_leek"?
Add Reply