Posted under Tags
BUR #17620 has been rejected.
create implication attempted_suicide -> suicide
create implication imminent_suicide -> suicide
create implication implied_suicide -> suicide
create implication suicide_pact -> suicide
Suicide should be a catch-all tag for people searching for and wanting to blacklist posts for all stages of suicide. I also made suicide pact recently, which is self-explanatory.
thelieutenant said:
we dont really do this with the other imminent or implied tags
users can put ~attempted_suicide ~imminent_suicide ~implied_suicide ~suicide_pact to get that effect, since wildcards dont work in blacklists
That's four tags users have to know about. People who don't want any posts of suicide can simply add suicide and that's it. How other tags do it shouldn't matter because not all tags are the same.
That's four tags users have to know about. People who don't want any posts of suicide can simply add suicide and that's it. How other tags do it shouldn't matter because not all tags are the same.
tag implications create standards for other tags, and standards will be enforced sooner or later leading to confusion why some of the tags have the implications and others dont
with the new search function anyone can type suicide and see all of the suicide tags
blacklisting is free for all, forum #191998
thelieutenant said:
tag implications create standards for other tags, and standards will be enforced sooner or later leading to confusion why some of the tags have the implications and others dont
with the new search function anyone can type suicide and see all of the suicide tags
blacklisting is free for all, forum #191998
If we're standardising tags, then topic #24070 wouldn't have been approved. Standardisation isn't as important as you make it out to be. Considering I recently created suicide pact, users shouldn't have to keep up with learning new tags.
that alias was shot down due to potential confusion, not out of respect for standardization
given that making sure users dont use tags like dumbasses is a higher priority, i dont see how these implications fit that bill
we have many objectionable tags for users to find, and any recent tag created will evade blacklists until users add it to their blacklist or its implied to the objectionable tag
i want things to be standard either one way or the other, so if suicide is objectionable to the point of implications, then dont forget imminent_rape, imminent_bestiality, imminent_death, imminent_vore, imminent_vomiting, imminent_cannibalism, imminent_egg_laying, and imminent_amputation
thelieutenant said:
i want things to be standard either one way or the other, so if suicide is objectionable to the point of implications, then dont forget imminent_rape, imminent_bestiality, imminent_death, imminent_vore, imminent_vomiting, imminent_cannibalism, imminent_egg_laying, and imminent_amputation
all potential implications that seem pretty reasonable and even preferable. Let's go with that.
Only have to point out forum #241235 , meaning the few parody posts that don't need the implication would be lumped in with the rest, but that's better than having a mass of untagged objectionable posts that most users would want covered by their blacklists.
thelieutenant said:
i want things to be standard either one way or the other, so if suicide is objectionable to the point of implications, then dont forget imminent_rape, imminent_bestiality, imminent_death, imminent_vore, imminent_vomiting, imminent_cannibalism, imminent_egg_laying, and imminent_amputation
Some of these are objectionable, like imminent vomiting -> vomiting. I'd recommend making a separate BUR for each in their own thread if someone wants to suggest them, to avoid having a single contentious one blocking everything else.
The bulk update request #17620 (forum #244788) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
