BUR #29146 has been rejected.
create implication bike_shorts_under_skirt -> bike_shorts
If you can identify bike shorts under skirt in the picture, then the bike shorts tag should also be included.
Posted under Tags
BUR #29146 has been rejected.
create implication bike_shorts_under_skirt -> bike_shorts
If you can identify bike shorts under skirt in the picture, then the bike shorts tag should also be included.
Previous topics of varying relevancy: topic #26339 topic #23912 topic #21742 topic #21488 topic #20598 topic #18828 topic #16986 topic #15287 topic #9914 topic #9491
BUR #29153 has been rejected.
deprecate bike_shorts_under_skirt
mass update bike_shorts_under_skirt -> -bike_shorts_under_skirt bike_shorts skirt favgroup:34159
Personally, I think it should be nuked. It's nothing more than a tandem tag, entirely replaceable with a two-tag bike_shorts skirt search. I went through the most recent 100 posts in said search, and I could count the number of false positives on one hand. That search, by the way, contains over 15,000 posts, while bike_shorts_under_skirt doesn't even break 5k - someone would need to add it to ten thousand posts in order for this tag to do anything other than pad those posts' tag count, and even then its only other function would be to replicate bike_shorts skirt.
What would actually make sense would be a bike_shorts_only tag, for when bike shorts are worn as shorts themselves. We have tens of thousands of posts where bike shorts are worn under skirts, dresses, and actual shorts, which means anyone trying to search for this has to search for something like bike_shorts -skirt -dress -shorts. Except even this doesn't work because some users tag bike shorts with color_shorts tags, meaning there's a decent chunk of applicable posts being filtered out because the color_shorts tags imply shorts.
Updated
I think it's a worthwhile concept specifically because it's not an "intended" use of that garment (even though it's more common than one would expect given our focus on anime topics). When characters wear it it's often specifically a character trait or at least something notable about the specific outfit or design, just like pantyhose under shorts.
岩戸鈴芽 said:
I think it's a worthwhile concept specifically because it's not an "intended" use of that garment (even though it's more common than one would expect given our focus on anime topics). When characters wear it it's often specifically a character trait or at least something notable about the specific outfit or design, just like pantyhose under shorts.
It doesn't matter whether it's intended or not. Just because Hitachi Magic Wands are "intended" to be electric massagers doesn't mean we need to make a hitachi_magic_wand_vibrator tag. All that really matters is how difficult a concept is to search for, and the fact remains that this one is incredibly easy to find with a simple two-tag search.
I don't mind getting rid of the tag, but wouldn't it be better to move the posts over to shorts under skirt?
Unbreakable said:
I don't mind getting rid of the tag, but wouldn't it be better to move the posts over to shorts under skirt?
That sounds like it'd open up the can of worms that is "are bike shorts shorts" for the.... 3rd time?
Unbreakable said:
I don't mind getting rid of the tag, but wouldn't it be better to move the posts over to shorts under skirt?
That's an entirely seperate discussion; I'd prefer it not derail this thread like it has numerous others. Nevertheless, I've updated the BUR to add all the current bike_shorts_under_skirt posts to favgroup #34159 - if we ever do figure out the answer to that age-old question, then shorts_under_skirt can easily be mass added to every post in that favgroup should we end up leaning towards "yes".
AngryZapdos said:
That's an entirely seperate discussion; I'd prefer it not derail this thread like it has numerous others. Nevertheless, I've updated the BUR to add all the current bike_shorts_under_skirt posts to favgroup #34159 - if we ever do figure out the answer to that age-old question, then shorts_under_skirt can easily be mass added to every post in that favgroup should we end up leaning towards "yes".
Good enough for me.
AngryZapdos said:
BUR #29153 has been rejected.
deprecate bike_shorts_under_skirt
mass update bike_shorts_under_skirt -> -bike_shorts_under_skirt bike_shorts skirt favgroup:34159Personally, I think it should be nuked. It's nothing more than a tandem tag, entirely replaceable with a two-tag bike_shorts skirt search. I went through the most recent 100 posts in said search, and I could count the number of false positives on one hand. That search, by the way, contains over 15,000 posts, while bike_shorts_under_skirt doesn't even break 5k - someone would need to add it to ten thousand posts in order for this tag to do anything other than pad those posts' tag count, and even then its only other function would be to replicate bike_shorts skirt.
What would actually make sense would be a bike_shorts_only tag, for when bike shorts are worn as shorts themselves. We have tens of thousands of posts where bike shorts are worn under skirts, dresses, and actual shorts, which means anyone trying to search for this has to search for something like bike_shorts -skirt -dress -shorts. Except even this doesn't work because some users tag bike shorts with color_shorts tags, meaning there's a decent chunk of applicable posts being filtered out because the color_shorts tags imply shorts.
"If I can't fix something, I'll destroy it completely"
Using two tags instead of the existing one will create problems for regular members (like me) who have a limit of 2 tags, and will make searching more difficult. For me, agreeing with this means shooting myself in the foot.
Yes, this clothes combination is not drawn very often, but I'm sure it's enough to have its own tag. I never understood the trend of breaking everything down into microtags, turning the search bar into a configuration console.
As said above, bike_shorts_under_skirt is not just a tag, it is a special element of appearance, the aesthetics of which are liked by a sufficient number of people.
I suggested adding an obvious auto-adding, which would simply eliminate some errors with adding the tag, but apparently the discussion about the implication of the tag turned into a discussion about its complete destruction.
Personally, I honestly don't understand what the problem is in just adding this implication instead of fighting the tag itself.
AngryZapdos said:
It doesn't matter whether it's intended or not. Just because Hitachi Magic Wands are "intended" to be electric massagers doesn't mean we need to make a hitachi_magic_wand_vibrator tag. All that really matters is how difficult a concept is to search for, and the fact remains that this one is incredibly easy to find with a simple two-tag search.
Of course not, because this tag will essentially mean two synonyms. Perhaps I did not understand the meaning of this comparison.
The bulk update request #29146 (forum #295409) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
The bulk update request #29153 (forum #295433) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
If we nuke this then people are just gonna start using shorts under skirt instead for bike shorts (like they already do: bike_shorts_under_skirt: 5523 posts, shorts_under_skirt bike_shorts: 5845 posts kek). Should we just not alias the two together and remove the implication to shorts to appease the bike short separatists?