Posted under Tags
BUR #34367 has been approved by @evazion.
create implication bad_face -> bad_anatomy
create implication bad_hands -> bad_anatomy
create implication bad_leg -> bad_anatomy
create implication bad_ass -> bad_anatomy
create implication bad_vulva -> bad_anatomy
create implication bad_neck -> bad_anatomy
These all fall under the umbrella of the tag bad_anatomy. Reposted due to a mistake of mine (edited after votes to seperate out bad_proportions)
BUR #34368 has been rejected.
deprecate bad_proportions
Bad anatomy can cover mean the entire body as a whole is bad or specific parts can, as can bad proportions, to me they are one and the same.
So I propose we also deprecate it and garden it (2.2k posts) into the appropriate tags and create new bad_x if there are significant gaps (i.e maybe bad_penis and bad_torso etc)
We can continue the conversation here since users are voting on these BURs, but in the future, it would be better to keep everything contained to a single thread.
From the previous thread:
Artxe said:
Then why does bad anatomy exist? They both cover the same thing do they not? Bad anatomy covers a specific part or the entire body, as does proportions.
As ANON TOKYO said in that thread, bad proportions is specifically for comparing the relative sizes of body parts, so it cannot apply to a single body part. Also, there are cases of bad anatomy that are not based on proportions. For example, a joint could be bent at an unnatural angle, the hands could be switched, the number of fingers or knuckles could be wrong, etc.
Clearly, bad proportions is not redundant with bad anatomy. You recognize that bad hands and other location-based groups are valid subsets of bad anatomy, so why do you believe the concept of proportions in general shouldn’t have its own tag?
…
Clearly, bad proportions is not redundant with bad anatomy. You recognize that bad hands and other location-based groups are valid subsets of bad anatomy, so why do you believe the concept of proportions in general shouldn’t have its own tag?
So my thinking was we already have people abusing artistic error and bad anatomy as a catch all, so I personally feel that where the tag name isn’t explicitly saying what’s wrong and is a catch all, we should imo try to reduce the amount of these as much as possible. Plus the end goal of these tags is “I don’t want search results that look ugly or weird” no? That’s why I think it’s okay to deprecate it.
Artxe said:
So my thinking was we already have people abusing artistic error and bad anatomy as a catch all, so I personally feel that where the tag name isn’t explicitly saying what’s wrong and is a catch all, we should imo try to reduce the amount of these as much as possible. Plus the end goal of these tags is “I don’t want search results that look ugly or weird” no? That’s why I think it’s okay to deprecate it.
But, the tag name is literally describing exactly what's wrong: the proportions in the anatomy. It makes no sense to have specific bad_* tags for this since it almost by necessity spans multiple bodyparts. Maybe there's some misuse, but I don't see why that can't be fixed, since it's hardly a gigantic tag.
The bulk update request #34367 (forum #321871) has been approved by @evazion.
The bulk update request #34368 (forum #321874) has been rejected by @evazion.
