create implication chromatic_aberration_abuse -> chromatic_aberration
Posted under Tags
create implication chromatic_aberration_abuse -> chromatic_aberration
I'm not entirely convinced of the usefulness of this tag either. If it only applied to posts where the aberration were of such severity as to be visible from the thumbnail, then yeah, it might be of value as a tag. But if it's barely visible even at full zoom like in post #2509076, this is something hardly worth tagging.
Unless @Fenen can provide a pretty convincing argument that this tag can be used objectively, my vote is to change the implication to an alias.
+1 to nuking it. I don't see what useful purpose it serves. Is anyone gonna add -chromatic_aberration_abuse to all their searches? No. Are you gonna blacklist it? I wouldn't, it's too subjective. It seems more like a passive-aggressive statement about the image than anything useful for searching.
mass update chromatic_aberration_abuse -> -chromatic_aberration_abuse
☆♪ said:
I don't know how it started
I would suspect it had something to do with the similar but rather more useful lens flare abuse.
☆♪ said:
mass update chromatic_aberration_abuse -> -chromatic_aberration_abuse
Does this really need a bulk update? I think a manual tag script of "chromatic_aberration -chromatic_aberration_abuse" for chromatic_aberration_abuse would be fine. It's only 77 results, and only two for chromatic_aberration_abuse -chromatic_aberration and they qualify as chromatic aberration.
sweetpeɐ said:
Does this really need a bulk update? I think a manual tag script of "chromatic_aberration -chromatic_aberration_abuse" for chromatic_aberration_abuse would be fine. It's only 77 results, and only two for chromatic_aberration_abuse -chromatic_aberration and they qualify as chromatic aberration.
Ultimately nothing "needs" a bulk update, I suppose, but I see no reason to spend the time sitting here clicking when a mod can do it with one button press. Unlike an alias or implication, there's no persistent impact on the site from a mass update, so unless it's something like 10 posts it seems worth it to me. If you want to do it with a tag script and reject the BUR, feel free.
Thanks for pointing out the posts with the abuse tag and not the normal one though, hadn't thought of those.
☆♪ said:
Ultimately nothing "needs" a bulk update, I suppose, but I see no reason to spend the time sitting here clicking when a mod can do it with one button press. Unlike an alias or implication, there's no persistent impact on the site from a mass update, so unless it's something like 10 posts it seems worth it to me. If you want to do it with a tag script and reject the BUR, feel free.
Thanks for pointing out the posts with the abuse tag and not the normal one though, hadn't thought of those.
Okay I was just wondering whether there was a specific reason I didn't know of. Using Danbooru EX (about:userscripts) it's pretty easy to make this change.
But I'm not convinced the tag should simply be nuked, I think captures a very specific look as in post #2544181 so maybe put these images in a pool rather than tag? I suggest the same for lens_flare_abuse.
The bulk update request #995 has been approved.
Bumping this topic because the tag has been repopulated since the bulk update. It seemed like the consensus was to get rid of the tag (and possibly create a pool to replace it), but if users who don't participate in the forum are going to recreate it anyway, is an alias necessary after all?
Tried to make the alias request, both as a bulk update and a normal one. Either way I get "Error: Antecedent name has already been taken" - does this mean we have to delete chromatic_aberration_abuse's wiki page first? I didn't want to do that without asking.
There's already an alias request pending, it was made in a separate thread (topic #13958)