no_humanoids tag

I would also like to see some feedback on this. As Trouble Windows said, the mistagging is still a problem, and will continue to be a problem as long as the tag's name remains no_humans.

I think the biggest problem is that reading no_humans at face value means exactly that. When I see a picture of Kirby scribbling on a sheet of paper, I see no humans there. Sure I see a round, pink character doing a normal human activity, but I still don't see a human.

So I think if we want the tag to exclude any possible human-like presence, it should reflect that notion better, something like no_one or nobody. This way, in the aforementioned Kirby example, there would be no humans present in the picture, but there wouldn't be nobody.

rainyd said:

I think the biggest problem is that reading no_humans at face value means exactly that. When I see a picture of Kirby scribbling on a sheet of paper, I see no humans there. Sure I see a round, pink character doing a normal human activity, but I still don't see a human.

So I think if we want the tag to exclude any possible human-like presence, it should reflect that notion better, something like no_one or nobody. This way, in the aforementioned Kirby example, there would be no humans present in the picture, but there wouldn't be nobody.

Kirby falls under no_humans anyways because he's not humanoid, he's a creature.

On a semi-related note I finally made the much-needed chibikemo tag, which should help as a compromise between people searching, say, other_focus who do want to see teeny anthropomorphic mascots, and those who don't, but don't mind the furries on the more human side of the scale. (It's also just a pretty popular trope)

Hopefully the no_humanoids BUR does get accepted, or we can find a better name, so the mistagging becomes less of a problem.