Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions
The bulk update request #243 has been rejected.
remove implication hyper_breasts (66045) -> huge_breasts (419219)
remove implication huge_breasts (419219) -> big_breasts (1056385)
Reason: Because each tiddy size category's tag, is meant to be a range of sizes, not a "this big and bigger" situation. And I figure it's about time these implications get undone.
EDIT: The bulk update request #243 (forum #295606) has been rejected by @Millcore.
Updated by auto moderator
Whoops. Had those tags the wrong way 'round. Fixed, now!
I still think it's useful to to have them tiered like they are given the imprecision in measuring them, and their wiki pages should just be clarified. At best, maybe deimplicate hyper from huge since huge is supposed to still be realistic if abnormal, while hyper is completely unrealistic, but not huge from big.
watsit said:
I still think it's useful to to have them tiered like they are given the imprecision in measuring them, and their wiki pages should just be clarified. At best, maybe deimplicate hyper from huge since huge is supposed to still be realistic if abnormal, while hyper is completely unrealistic, but not huge from big.
But there's still a distinct cutoff between huge and big, too. Or, at least more distinct than you're implying. If they're bigger than her head (or bigger than her head should be for her body size) then they're huge. If they're exactly as big as her head (or as big as her head should be) or smaller, but bigger than would be average for her body size, they're big.
It's a mixed bag. They do make blacklisting easier. Someone who doesn't want to see big_breasts probably doesn't want to see huge_breasts or hyper_breasts either. But the same thinking makes searching only for a given size harder.
At least the site redesign effectively removed the search term and blacklist length limits so that's not a problem anymore.
jacob said:
But there's still a distinct cutoff between huge and big, too. Or, at least more distinct than you're implying. If they're bigger than her head (or bigger than her head should be for her body size) then they're huge.
It's still open to interpretation. These are drawings of fantasy creatures, perspective and anatomical accuracy won't be perfect, and the closer it gets to the line the harder it will be to say one way or another.
animperfectpatsy said:
Someone who doesn't want to see big_breasts probably doesn't want to see huge_breasts or hyper_breasts either.
Yeah, and someone who wants to see big_breasts probably wouldn't like missing posts because someone else considered that particular image to be huge_breasts. Someone who searches for or blacklists big_breasts will 9 times out of 10 also be adding huge_breasts if not hyper_breasts too, so making them tiered helps this common case. The uncommon case can still be dealt with given appropriate negations (big_breasts -huge_breasts to find or blacklist only big_breasts, excluding huge and hyper, for example).
The only thing I'll add here is that if they aren't de-implicated I think the wiki entries should be edited.
The bulk update request #243 (forum #295606) has been rejected by @Millcore.
