BUR #30619 has been rejected.
create implication grin -> teeth
Not sure why this hasn't been implied yet, but I'm open to some stupid bullshit meaning it won't cover all cases. Feel free to mention any.
Posted under Tags
BUR #30619 has been rejected.
create implication grin -> teeth
Not sure why this hasn't been implied yet, but I'm open to some stupid bullshit meaning it won't cover all cases. Feel free to mention any.
Only topic I can find is topic #13662, I guess the obvious case would be if people tag grin on the posts where the mouth is just a white void.
I hate how hard it is to find imagines with defined teeth. post #8073516 (grin) for instance is the last thing I'm looking for. I already have to remove upper_teeth_only and lower_teeth_only from a search but this would absolutely flood the tag and make posts like post #7660379 even harder to find.
zetsubousensei said:
I hate how hard it is to find imagines with defined teeth. post #8073516 (grin) for instance is the last thing I'm looking for. I already have to remove upper_teeth_only and lower_teeth_only from a search but this would absolutely flood the tag and make posts like post #7660379 even harder to find.
You're right, it is difficult to find posts where the teeth have been rendered with more detail than just a flat white color. However, I don't think that should stand in the way of this BUR; rather, I think it's a reason to create a detailed_teeth tag. You would have my full support for that.
AngryZapdos said:
I think it's a reason to create a detailed_teeth tag.
Watch it overlap with sharp_teeth for 99.999% of the posts.
AngryZapdos said:
You're right, it is difficult to find posts where the teeth have been rendered with more detail than just a flat white color. However, I don't think that should stand in the way of this BUR; rather, I think it's a reason to create a detailed_teeth tag. You would have my full support for that.
I think it should stand in the way of this BUR, as the implication only makes real sense in an overly literal logic, doesn't help search for anything, and yet, makes it harder to search for something more specific. It's just not worth it even if we create a "defined teeth" tag as a bandaid
Mayhem-Chan said:
I think it should stand in the way of this BUR, as the implication only makes real sense in an overly literal logic, doesn't help search for anything, and yet, makes it harder to search for something more specific. It's just not worth it even if we create a "defined teeth" tag as a bandaid
>"It's difficult to search for detailed teeth"
>"Ok, let's make a detailed_teeth tag"
>"That's just a bandaid solution"
?????
AngryZapdos said:
>"It's difficult to search for detailed teeth"
>"Ok, let's make a detailed_teeth tag"
>"That's just a bandaid solution"?????
↓
Watch it overlap with sharp_teeth for 99.999% of the posts.
+ vast majority of cases that aren't sharp teeth will be a pain in the ass to find and add to the new tag (even if we create and populate it before approving the implication BUR). An effort that isn't worth going with the implication based on what zetsubousensei said, since thinking about the practical use of tags is more relevant; If people who search teeth don't want to be flooded by stuff like post #8096726 and post #8073516 just because it's tagged grin (just look at the first page of the tag and see how many posts have that same issue), then why does it matter that grin implies teeth? What does it achieve for search purposes?
The logic behind the BUR is easy to understand, but at the end of the day, practical use matters more
nonamethanks said:
Watch it overlap with sharp_teeth for 99.999% of the posts.
Sharp teeth per se aren't detailed.
The bulk update request #30619 (forum #304146) has been rejected by @nonamethanks.