UNofficial implication thread

done

It had “small penis” aliased to it before I came in. So no, it’s just all small penii regardless of anatomical type.

If someone does it, it won’t be me. Hell, I’d rather remove all implications and make the tag invalid! IMO “tail” (or any other basic anatomical tags like “legs”, “eyes” or “fingers”) is used in a completely pointless way on e621, and by extension other boorus. There’s no reason to tag for features that are gonna be in the vast majority of images that happen to show the relevant section of the body. There’s a reason we don’t tag stuff as “character present” or “drawn art”: it’s part of the very medium!

Now tagging for the unexpected absence or presence of a feature is far more useful with tags like , though even there I think e61 goes WAY overboard with stuff like “non-mammalian nipples”.

@Dillocircus
Fair enough…
I wondered about “non-mammalian nipples” as well. I think most people don’t give a shit about non-mammals having nipples.
The fingers thing makes me think, I hope the finger count and toe count tags stay, because… I don’t how common this is, but I have a pet peeve with human-like feet on species that aren’t human or humanoid, especially when like half of the canvas is occupied by feet.

In theory the latter is filtered off with “foot focus” (though I have no idea how prevalent that tag is on cutepa.ws for images that you want to aviod).

Seeing how oc has been made an error tag recently, I noticed it appears automatically when you tag an OC, but it’s (apparently) not actually implied by anything, which is weird, and you always to have to remove it manually.

@Stinkek
yeah, I may have to reverse that. I know that it was not originally like that though, because there was not enough uses of it to reflect the amount of actual images with OCs in them.

Either way, I can mass-remove the tag easily, so don’t worry about it too much. I’ll be the one taking any flak (and mass-readding it lol) if Pup’s upset over it 😅

Turns out Philomena’s namespace thing results in this EXTREMELY awkward thing where “oc:” is not actually part of the tag name, so while you can search for all oc: tags, you cannot use a search like “oc:” to find all images with oc tags, because that search is considered exactly the same as “”…