This thread can be used for smaller tagging questions or discussions or suggestions that don't need their own thread.

Use of "mammal"
I think we should probably reserve the term "mammal" to refer to monsters that are clearly made to resemble real-life mammals and not count humans as mammals. Currently, there are images of birds and snakes and swords tagged as mammal xD

anonymous said:
Use of "mammal"
I think we should probably reserve the term "mammal" to refer to monsters that are clearly made to resemble real-life mammals and not count humans as mammals. Currently, there are images of birds and snakes and swords tagged as mammal xD

ugh ive had the same thoughts. i kept doing it because i thought.. what if its useful. (nonsense i know) maybe we should write this down somewhere...

dronedartdrain-tc said:
ugh ive had the same thoughts. i kept doing it because i thought.. what if its useful. (nonsense i know) maybe we should write this down somewhere...

wrote a suggestion here, feel free to edit: https://monyu.me/wiki_pages/6

anonymous said:
wrote a suggestion here, feel free to edit: https://monyu.me/wiki_pages/6

made some clarity changes by splitting the use and not use categories.
made the -do not use for humans- clearer and put it at the top.
also used the dtext list feature. thank you for your contribution cause yeah this definitely needs to be sorted lol.

Flesh / Body Horror Monsters
I have a few more detailed fleshies that I thought I didn't want to upload right away in case we should have some kind of default blacklist for those. I'm guessing since we're spanning all the way to cute critters not everyone might want to see very detailed flesh constructs, but I'm not really sure if that's something others are actually sensitive about.

A good example is here: https://gelbooru.com/index.php?id=10637742&page=post&s=view

anonymous said:
Flesh / Body Horror Monsters
I have a few more detailed fleshies that I thought I didn't want to upload right away in case we should have some kind of default blacklist for those. I'm guessing since we're spanning all the way to cute critters not everyone might want to see very detailed flesh constructs, but I'm not really sure if that's something others are actually sensitive about.

A good example is here: https://gelbooru.com/index.php?id=10637742&page=post&s=view

i do think these definitely belong here cause the only concerns ive heard were the opposite but yeah hmm. i guess we should blacklist flesh_creature to be safe? these can get pretty gorey sometimes.
edit: ill ask the host about it.

I think a "gruesome" tag might be suitable to capture things like some chokobun drawings that aren't really flesh monsters but can look very unsettling nonetheless, and might allow some non-gruesome flesh_monsters to be posted without being blacklisted (there are a few chibi fleshies out there). I'd probably avoid the term "guro" to not lump together gruesome monsters with gore depictions or girls with their heads chopped off or whatever (which i'd kind of question is a good fit for the booru in the first place).

some examples
https://yumeboo.ru/post/7400
https://yumeboo.ru/post/6983
https://yumeboo.ru/post/7393

anonymous said:
I think a "gruesome" tag might be suitable to capture things like some chokobun drawings that aren't really flesh monsters but can look very unsettling nonetheless, and might allow some non-gruesome flesh_monsters to be posted without being blacklisted (there are a few chibi fleshies out there). I'd probably avoid the term "guro" to not lump together gruesome monsters with gore depictions or girls with their heads chopped off or whatever (which i'd kind of question is a good fit for the booru in the first place).

some examples
https://yumeboo.ru/post/7400
https://yumeboo.ru/post/6983
https://yumeboo.ru/post/7393

this sounds like a really good idea. something like gruesome just makes sense to be on the list and doesnt auto hide all of those creatures.
edit: added that thought and sent it to the host.

Just caught up on these. Thanks for jumping in and writing wiki pages!
 

anonymous said:
Use of "mammal"

I generally agree with what you put on the mammal page. The only recommendation I have is to add some example posts to help provide some practical cases that followed these guidelines.
 

anonymous said:
Flesh / Body Horror Monsters

Definitely tag these but I don't think we need to blacklist them by default. These are prime candidates for users to self blacklist instead. I support posting all the examples from the thread here with a gruesome / flesh_monster / gruesome_monster tag or whatever you think fits best!
It's kind of funny since the booru has explicit art of monsters as well as these weird sfw creatures. I think we'd look a bit strange if we allowed dongs uncensored but drew the line at fleshy non genitalia. ;)
 

anonymous said:
I'd probably avoid the term "guro" to not lump together gruesome monsters with gore depictions or girls with their heads chopped off or whatever (which i'd kind of question is a good fit for the booru in the first place).

That makes sense. And yes guro of the girls doesn't feel like it fits with the yume theme. I imagine we might allow gore if a pic depicted a monster killing another monster to save his yume but that's about it.

Size Differences
It's probably sufficient to tag larger_monster / smaller_monster and not both larger_monster / smaller_human or just use aliasing.

In regards to size differences, I'm not sure what should constitute a "larger" or "much larger" monster. I'd guess a monster more than ~1.5x the size of the human would be a "larger monster", a monster ~3x the size of the human would be a "much larger" monster, and anything that's "how would you even hug that thing" is an "extremely much larger monster".

For smaller monsters, I think a rule of thumb could be "if it's lower than the chest, it's a smaller monster, if lower than the knees, it's a much smaller monster", and if smaller than a foot or a hand it's an "extremely much smaller monster".

Monster vs Creature
There are currently two conventions for describing monsters, "monster" and "creature". I think we should try to settle for one of them and rename the others. Things like "gooey_creature" and "eldritch_monster" etc.

anonymous said:
Monster vs Creature
There are currently two conventions for describing monsters, "monster" and "creature". I think we should try to settle for one of them and rename the others. Things like "gooey_creature" and "eldritch_monster" etc.

It's monyume, not creatyume. I'm strongly in favor of monster.

anonymous said:
Size Differences
It's probably sufficient to tag larger_monster / smaller_monster and not both larger_monster / smaller_human or just use aliasing.

i had the same thought but i didnt really comment on it because the host seemed to like it. maybe i should ask after all.

anonymous said:
Monster vs Creature
There are currently two conventions for describing monsters, "monster" and "creature". I think we should try to settle for one of them and rename the others. Things like "gooey_creature" and "eldritch_monster" etc.

we were going with monster. at least thats what i thought makes sense.
edit: thought. we use e6 tags so.. i guess we could alias it to our monster tags. i will ask.

wawanya said:

That makes sense. And yes guro of the girls doesn't feel like it fits with the yume theme. I imagine we might allow gore if a pic depicted a monster killing another monster to save his yume but that's about it.

if people arent gonna allow it then make an exception for story/artistic purposes like music videos or comics where the monster and girl are in some sort of relationship.
doesnt really make sense to censor part of a nightmare or some monsters gf dying at the hands of others which is supposed to have some emotional impact.
there could also be internal conflicts in the monster between wanting to eat a girl and loving her so thats another thing im not sure about here.
then theres also just background elements like some person dying in general somewhere or somehow in a story.
i guess youd have to describe appropriate uses of gore.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
if people arent gonna allow it then make an exception for story/artistic purposes like music videos or comics where the monster and girl are in some sort of relationship.
doesnt really make sense to censor part of a nightmare or some monsters gf dying at the hands of others which is supposed to have some emotional impact.
there could also be internal conflicts in the monster between wanting to eat a girl and loving her so thats another thing im not sure about here.
then theres also just background elements like some person dying in general somewhere or somehow in a story.
i guess youd have to describe appropriate uses of gore.

As long as it's under a separate tag (gruesome_human / gruesome_monster) I don't really mind it. I don't think exceptions are necessary in that case because it's a relatively fringe overlap to begin with. I do feel it might qualify for a default blacklist, as these are more or less always depictions of extreme violence or self-harm/suicide. I think these are likely to be sensitive topics for some who would just happen to pass by, and they are usually opt-in on other sites.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
i had the same thought but i didnt really comment on it because the host seemed to like it. maybe i should ask after all.

I'd just alias smaller_human / larger_human to their corresponding larger_monster / smaller_monster equivalents.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
we were going with monster. at least thats what i thought makes sense.
edit: thought. we use e6 tags so.. i guess we could alias it to our monster tags. i will ask.

I think a good solution is to alias E6 tags to our tags, especially things like flora_fauna and marine so we can use more easily searchable and accurate terms.

anonymous said:
Size Differences

I replied to this discussion in topic #14 before I saw the conversation here. Do you mind if we continue there?
 

anonymous said:
Monster vs Creature
There are currently two conventions for describing monsters, "monster" and "creature". I think we should try to settle for one of them and rename the others. Things like "gooey_creature" and "eldritch_monster" etc.

swoop4783 said:
It's monyume, not creatyume. I'm strongly in favor of monster.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
we were going with monster. at least thats what i thought makes sense.
edit: thought. we use e6 tags so.. i guess we could alias it to our monster tags. i will ask.

anonymous said:
I think a good solution is to alias E6 tags to our tags, especially things like flora_fauna and marine so we can use more easily searchable and accurate terms.

Yeh let's stay with monster. =D Aliasing the e6 tags is the best thing to do too. The general approach that should guide us is to start with what e6 does but improve how we need.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
if people arent gonna allow it then make an exception for story/artistic purposes like music videos or comics where the monster and girl are in some sort of relationship.
doesnt really make sense to censor part of a nightmare or some monsters gf dying at the hands of others which is supposed to have some emotional impact.
there could also be internal conflicts in the monster between wanting to eat a girl and loving her so thats another thing im not sure about here.
then theres also just background elements like some person dying in general somewhere or somehow in a story.
i guess youd have to describe appropriate uses of gore.

anonymous said:
As long as it's under a separate tag (gruesome_human / gruesome_monster) I don't really mind it. I don't think exceptions are necessary in that case because it's a relatively fringe overlap to begin with. I do feel it might qualify for a default blacklist, as these are more or less always depictions of extreme violence or self-harm/suicide. I think these are likely to be sensitive topics for some who would just happen to pass by, and they are usually opt-in on other sites.

Oh right yes. If violence, gore or death is a tied to the relationship themes then they still belong here. I was more worried about stuff that was more gratuitous, pointless bloodshed.
But you're right these should go on the default blacklist when someone eventually uploads something like that. It's how e6 deals with them and it's still easy to disable too.

tag names

i am not the best with names so drop suggestions if you like.

creature - > monster tags

i aliased all the ones that make sense already.
should we do

• flora_fauna

-> plant_monster? or flora_fauna_monster?
‎

• fungi_fauna

-> mushroom_monster? or fungi_monster? (mushroom could feel more restrictive because it doesnt sound like mold.) edit: (ah yeah i just googled. mold is actually not a mushroom but still fungus.)
‎

• marine

-> marine_monster? (im not sure what else could describe all creatures that look like they live underwater.. underwater monster just sounds strange to me and maybe even more restrictive.)

anthros / furries

we need a tag for furries so users can filter or look for them. by furries i mean things that pretty much look like humans with animal/pokemon heads.
(yeah id count certain anthro pokemon like cinderace as well but we can leave out pokemon if people want that cause it could muddy the definition like the regular anthro tag..?)
i was thinking furry_anthro. easy to understand. this one im pretty confident in. should be a species tag.

we also need a tag name for basically more "humanized" faced anthros with many human like features like human-ish hair, human eyes, flat snouts, eyebrows, etc.
stock furry was mentioned but this is hard to understand for people outside of that discussion so i really wouldnt use this.
maybe humanized_face_anthro? humanoid_face_anthro? humanoid_faced_anthro? another species tag maybe so people see it exists? id go with humanized_face_anthro myself unless someone has a better idea.

edit: ah maybe we should go with head instead if we are talking about things like hair..
humanized_head_anthro? humanoid_head_anthro? humanoid_headed_anthro? id go with humanized_head_anthro.

edit: (i guess you could make it more specific with furry anthro but that gets long. humanized_head_furryanthro? humanized_head_furry_anthro?)

humanoids

what to name monsters that look too humanoid? another species tag?
very_humanoid? subtle_monster? almost_human_monster? almost_human?

i think:

• plant_monster or plantlike_monster is preferrable to flora_fauna, i think it's less ambiguous that it describes a monster (and not just plants and/or animals in general) and uses simpler language.
• aquatic_monster is preferrable to marine_monster. marine specifically refers to saltwater, and i don't think we should mislabel it even if that's what e6 does.
• fungi_monster is preferrable, i think most people know what fungi means and it's slightly broader (mushroom_monster can be aliased to fungal_monster).
• anthro_head could describe cases where a monsters head, specifically, has been anthropomorphized/humanized from what you'd expect.

anonymous said:
i think:

• plant_monster or plantlike_monster is preferrable to flora_fauna, i think it's clearer that it describes a monster (and not just plants and/or animals in general) and uses simpler language.
• aquatic_monster is preferrable to marine_monster. marine specifically refers to saltwater, and i don't think we should mislabel it even if that's what e6 does.
• fungi_monster is preferrable, i think most people know what fungi means and it's slightly broader.

aquatic is a great word and makes it less inaccurate.
we could do plantlike or plant but.. hm if you start using -like- in the words then you could technically do that for a lot of species names so maybe not.
yeah i think fungi makes sense too.

im not against anthro head but it just kinda sounds like the head of an anthro rather than a more humanized looking anthro.

yeah, plant_monster is probably preferrable. i've used "like" in a few contexts like snake_like ("serpentine" on e6) and fish_like, where there's usually a more clear contradiction, but i think most plant monsters are partially plants to begin with.

I think we should carefully reject the usual convention of treating anthro as a noun that is shorthand for "anthro-furry" rather than "anthropomorphized", but it could probably be misunderstood as a noun in the "proper" direction as well and just refer to human heads, so maybe it could just be called "anthropomorphized_head". things like "humanized_anthro" gets into a weird clash, whereas "humanoid" typically refers to general body shape.

anonymous said:
yeah, plant_monster is probably preferrable.

I agree with this. The flora_fauna tag gets some crossover use on 1 booru I can find but Danbooru and Gelbooru both gravitate toward plant_<character> and I think users would too.
 

anonymous said:

• fungi_monster is preferrable, i think most people know what fungi means and it's slightly broader (mushroom_monster can be aliased to fungal_monster).* anthro_head could describe cases where a monsters head, specifically, has been anthropomorphized/humanized from what you'd expect.

Also agree with this. I wonder how many fungi posts we'll get lol. We'll be prepared though!
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
aquatic is a great word and makes it less inaccurate.

Yes aquatic_<character> is very good. This is also a good tag to break away from e6 on since I have to double check what the water creature tag is there and usually think it's aquatic too.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
i was thinking furry_anthro. easy to understand. this one im pretty confident in. should be a species tag.

There's been changes in the community where they use the terms anthro and feral much more than they used to. You even have the Human Male on Female Anthro /hmofa/ community prefer anthro to the point where some swear off the the furry label.
The furry_anthro tag makes sense. Preferring to use anthro to better encapsulate furry characters is a good idea while also preventing amusing but nonsense tagging like furry_furry or lizard_furry (although for that last one we'd just call use scalie instead.)
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
edit: ah maybe we should go with head instead if we are talking about things like hair..
humanized_head_anthro? humanoid_head_anthro? humanoid_headed_anthro? id go with humanized_head_anthro.

Tagging characters for their head is a better idea than their face I think since I'm not sure we need such particular detail on something people might forget to tag. Using humanized also fits with the other form altering tags like furrification, anthrofied and feralizaed.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
edit: (i guess you could make it more specific with furry anthro but that gets long. humanized_head_furryanthro? humanized_head_furry_anthro?)

We should be able to achieve this by using more than 1 tag in a search. So humanized_head_anthro furry_anthro should cover this.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
humanoids

what to name monsters that look too humanoid? another species tag?
very_humanoid? subtle_monster? almost_human_monster? almost_human?

Maybe monstrous_humanoid? This is a good tag idea to have though.

gray vs grey..

we started using gray so i started using that in implications and aliases but i can still undo it. should i fix this?
i didnt really notice e6 uses grey instead. .(sighs)

i saw they use teal instead of turquoise as well so i did go back and fixed the hair/eye tags to say teal instead..

wawanya said:

I agree with this.

plant monster it is then.

wawanya said:

Also agree with this.

ok then we do fungi monster. might look for some shroom monsters to upload now.

wawanya said:

Yes aquatic_<character> is very good.

good then its aquatic monster now.

wawanya said:
You even have the Human Male on Female Anthro /hmofa/ community prefer anthro to the point where some swear off the the furry label.

ah that.
i know user vs. monster being labeled furry is different but this reminds me of bronies where they dont relate to that community so they pretend that the ponies arent ferals and dont fall into that furry territory.
(even their boorus dont use the feral tag. just pony.)
i really dont relate to the western furry community either (the kemono one more. kinda like hmofa users i suppose?) but when it comes to the tag then it does help in describing things accurately and concisely
regardless of whether someone cringe you relate to or not exists somewhere. this would be kinda like dropping the emo label for clothes.
just doesnt make sense to invent new words no one understands.
i always thought that behavior of distancing yourself from certain web words like feral at all costs was a bit silly. not like it mattered but here this is actually a helpful tag..
unless people wanna settle on funny_animal so we dont offend someone which.. hey im actually not against. i just think thats really damn amusing and its making me laugh.

wawanya said:
The furry_anthro tag makes sense.

okay ill use it now then. we can just alias it or whatever if the name changes.

wawanya said:
Maybe monstrous_humanoid?

i do not really like this because it sounds like any type of humanoid that happens to be a monster (gallade) and not one thats closer to being a human. (masada)

dronedartdrain-tc said:
i know user vs. monster being labeled furry is different but this reminds me of bronies where they dont relate to that community so they pretend that the ponies arent ferals and dont fall into that furry territory.
(even their boorus dont use the feral tag. just pony.)

Oh my god lol that was so funny. Especially the bronies who still said they hated furries! Stop hitting yourself, stop hitting yourself!
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
i really dont relate to the western furry community either (the kemono one more. kinda like hmofa users i suppose?) but when it comes to the tag then it does help in describing things accurately and concisely
regardless of whether someone cringe you relate to or not exists somewhere. this would be kinda like dropping the emo label for clothes.
just doesnt make sense to invent new words no one understands.

Sometimes I wonder what the western furry fandom would look like if they drew their characters more like kemono rather than trying to copy Disney and Sonic and failing alot of the time. It also seems like the kemono artists and followers are far less deranged but idk how it really plays out in those circles.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
i always thought that behavior of distancing yourself from certain web words like feral at all costs was a bit silly. not like it mattered but here this is actually a helpful tag..

It's weird because some words can get very different treatment in different places. Some sfw artists who sometimes take commissions from furries can end up using feral really casually when referring to their non furry animal art. On the other hand since there are so many blatent zoos in the furry fandom that other furs take the opposite approach and stay away from anything feral. I guess that's beyond the scope of tagging though.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
i do not really like this because it sounds like any type of humanoid that happens to be a monster (gallade) and not one thats closer to being a human. (masada)

That's fair. What about something like borderline_human or borderline_humanoid? I can try and think of some other ideas that are similar to those.
 

Alot of the monster type discussion applies to the BUR in topic #10. Do we need to change that script at all or is it ready to run? Maybe we should have had some of this discussion there instead but oh well.

i keep thinking its not too late to start tagging monsters with specific clothes.
i made the clothed_monster and clothed_human tags and have been using them but thats not good enough to search for a monster wearing.. anything specific.
shirt + clothed monster = humans and monsters wearing shirts.. this will get especially messy with furry anthros.
what to do. just put monster after the clothing article? yellow jacket monster? green pants monster? basically right now this can still be fixed by me and i want to do that but i need to know if my tag idea is acceptable.
this was touched upon in the thread so its not like this isnt a wanted feature.

also i will continue using gray instead of grey if its not that important.

wawanya said:

 That's fair. What about something like borderline_human or borderline_humanoid? I can try and think of some other ideas that are similar to those.
 

borderline human would work.

edit:
about the furry anthro tag
i have thought about the tag and how to keep it on track.
https://files.catbox.moe/3dud2c.png

edit:
more thoughts.
you have to ask yourself how relevant is the furry anthro tag on something like animal crossing or sonic because it isnt relevant to people that dont like it since they can just blacklist the whole franchise..
people could even blacklist digimon or pokemon characters they dont like easily.
at that point i ask myself ok how relevant is that material to an amohf user? i have a huge bias for cute chibis so i cannot answer this.
i could ask in the amohf thread when i see it but right now my only reference point is wawanya. wawanya would you say that on model animal crossing or male renamon..
are of interest to you because theyre anthros?
then again wawanya was active in the pokemon threads so we do not have the opinion of someone who only likes true anthros at all right now. that perspective is missing.
im gonna go ahead and say that sonic is too deformed and easily blacklisted to be relevant enough for the tag.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
what to do. just put monster after the clothing article? yellow jacket monster? green pants monster? basically right now this can still be fixed by me and i want to do that but i need to know if my tag idea is acceptable.

The unfortunate limitation of boorus is that there's no way to assign individual post tags to a parent like you can with tag implications. That way you could have jacket (child) -> monster (parent) and then somehow search for monster:jacket or something.
Tag combinations between clothes and monsters or humans might be too detailed since there's far less re-usability of those tags. The simplest way you could represent this is something like jacket_on_monster + yellow_jacket. Even that doesn't seem right to me so I'm not sure this is a problem we're able to solve cleanly.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
also i will continue using gray instead of grey if its not that important.

I'm not picky. My guess is that gray and grey have about 50/50 use so we should either use whatever one is used by more boorus or pick one version and stay with it.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
borderline human would work.

Awesome! I wonder if they're a pathway to husbandos considerably more monstrous...!
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
about the furry anthro tag
i have thought about the tag and how to keep it on track.
https://files.catbox.moe/3dud2c.png

Actually when I was talking about the furry_anthro I was thinking of an anthro with fur rather than an anthro that had a style typical for furry fandom characters. So focusing on the fur rather than the anthropomorphism. Maybe we should tag anthros with fur as furred_anthro or furred_monster instead to avoid that?

However I think trying to categorize different kinds of anthros isn't a bad idea. Each of the groups in your pic could have their own tag instead of trying to tag them as furry_anthro or not.

The bottom group in red could use a tag like wild_anthro, primitive_anthro, bestial_anthro or possibly natural_anthro. These examples try to emphasize the more animalistic nature of these anthros like level 4 on the kemono staircase linked in forum #44.

Above them in the yellow group I could tag these mascot_anthro. They're not quite chibi but certainly don't have a human posture. The term has a little similarity to the /trash/ thread for /tdm/ or Teitoshin Deformed Mascot but those tend to be shorter. Characters from Sonic and Animal Crossing have the size of anthros on level 4 of the kemono staircase but wear clothes and stand straight. Could this tag work?

Unfortunately the more conventional furries in the green group labelled furry anthros are the hardest to give a tag to like this. These belong on level 2 or 3 of the kemono staircase. They are the most anthropomorphic but using words like human or anthro to describe them doesn't really work (or else we could end up with anthro_anthro lol).
Things like civilized_anthro, domesticized_anthro, modern_anthro or evolved_anthro might not fit. Something like full_stature_anthro is clunky but maybe going in the right direction. An option like enlightened_anthro is too much but does imply historical advancement like in human history. Not sure about cultured_anthro either. You could also consider integrated_anthro or adapted_anthro which I think is slightly better.
However one tag that really accurately describes them despite not being a pre-existing term in the community is convergent_anthro which implies those species developed to have similar traits to humans while still maintaining their own identity. How suitable is that?

This tagging scheme might avoid problems for franchise characters in the white group. However if you wanted a tag specifically for furry fandom style characters in the green group on their own we'd need to think further about that.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
at that point i ask myself ok how relevant is that material to an amohf user? i have a huge bias for cute chibis so i cannot answer this.
i could ask in the amohf thread when i see it but right now my only reference point is wawanya. wawanya would you say that on model animal crossing or male renamon..
are of interest to you because theyre anthros?
then again wawanya was active in the pokemon threads so we do not have the opinion of someone who only likes true anthros at all right now. that perspective is missing.
im gonna go ahead and say that sonic is too deformed and easily blacklisted to be relevant enough for the tag.

I really like male Renamon even though he's a bit rare. Sonic and Animal Crossing don't interest me so much personally but I have browsed /cutedom/ before so an /amohf/ mascot might catch my attention sometime.

very minor thought?
mega pokemon are not implying their original form. so if you search altaria then the mega will not show. should we keep it that way or change it.

wawanya said:

The simplest way you could represent this is something like jacket_on_monster + yellow_jacket. Even that doesn't seem right to me so I'm not sure this is a problem we're able to solve cleanly.

well its better than having absolutely nothing sigh. even if the reusability isnt that high on specific colors i still think its ok to use cause well what if someone wants to search that for whatever reason...
which yeah makes sense on this booru.
maybe they just wanna see it or theyre trying to find an image they saw years ago. i know you dont like the long tags but id just use it tbh. i can just do the general category like jacket for now if you dont like it.

wawanya said:
Actually when I was talking about the furry_anthro I was thinking of an anthro with fur

ahhh okay i see.

wawanya said:
mascot_anthro

i actually really like this tag! cause yeah they dont really fit in with what i was doing yet theyre still just animal people in some way..
i was thinking these are probably not as interesting to amohf users. your answer confirms that to me.
this could be easily defined too based on head to body ratio... maybe clothes.. it could include only planti or both leg types but both together could fall more into a general mascot body type tag..
tdm and mascot anthro should not be the same thing. meaning very tdm shouldnt be mascot anthros... this could be easily defined though. head to body ratio. clothes. leg type.

(ok im thinking about this right now. )
basically any character thats 1:1 or below with digitigrade legs would be a pure tdm and not a mascot anthro.
theres characters like kuromi but shes plantigrade with that same ratio which is just like old ac villagers. im fine with letting those types fall into mascot anthro and even tdm both.
anything larger than that could just fall into mascot anthro or mascot body regardless of legs. just depends on what tag we wanna use.. a general mascot body tag might make the most sense.

tdm for the small digitigrade ones and mascot body for either all of those.. or only larger ones..

but ok my leg autism is showing again and its making it complicated.

the most simple way would be:
pure_tdm for 1:1 head ratio or below.
and mascot body for all of them or larger ones.
just 2 tags defined by head to body size and nothing else. the ratio could be changed. its just my first thought.

wawanya said:
Things like civilized_anthro, domesticized_anthro, modern_anthro or evolved_anthro might not fit.

hmm the moment they dont wear clothes or a loincloth instead it doesnt really fit that well which ah hmm i was kinda trying to put them into a group regardless of what theyre wearing.
making smaller tag groups for anthros is a very cool idea though. something like those civilized or cultured tags for clothes wearing ones would be quite nice actually.

when it comes to my idea of grouping them together then hmm i keep thinking i call them true_anthros so maybe that? that sounds like something that could work... maybe fandom_anthros to make it really clear when we are just tagging the green group here.

wawanya said:
This tagging scheme might avoid problems for franchise characters in the white group.

yeah maybe we just exclude the white group to make it easier after all. just give them their own sort of tag..?

the idea of splitting them into different tags really isnt a bad one. probably more simple than my initial approach.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
very minor thought?
mega pokemon are not implying their original form. so if you search altaria then the mega will not show. should we keep it that way or change it.

On e6 each mega Pokemon species has an implication to the mega_evolution tag that then has an implication to the pokemon_(species) tag. That setup should solve this issue for us.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
maybe they just wanna see it or theyre trying to find an image they saw years ago. i know you dont like the long tags but id just use it tbh. i can just do the general category like jacket for now if you dont like it.

I say we go with the multiple tag setup I suggested then since someone searching for a monster wearing a yellow jacket probably wouldn't be overwhelmed by undesired results of pictures where both characters are wearing jackets but only the girl is wearing a yellow jacket while the monster has a different color. How does that sound?
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
tdm and mascot anthro should not be the same thing. meaning very tdm shouldnt be mascot anthros... this could be easily defined though. head to body ratio. clothes. leg type.

This works for me. I did think /tdm/ were distinct for having smaller forms even if the name in Japanese has 'mascot' in it.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
theres characters like kuromi but shes plantigrade with that same ratio which is just like old ac villagers. im fine with letting those types fall into mascot anthro and even tdm both.
anything larger than that could just fall into mascot anthro or mascot body regardless of legs. just depends on what tag we wanna use.. a general mascot body tag might make the most sense.

the most simple way would be:
pure_tdm for 1:1 head ratio or below.
and mascot body for all of them or larger ones.
just 2 tags defined by head to body size and nothing else. the ratio could be changed. its just my first thought.

I wonder what /tdm/ fans think about AC characters like that. Otherwise I'm comfortable going with this convention.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
making smaller tag groups for anthros is a very cool idea though. something like those civilized or cultured tags for clothes wearing ones would be quite nice actually.

when it comes to my idea of grouping them together then hmm i keep thinking i call them true_anthros so maybe that? that sounds like something that could work... maybe fandom_anthros to make it really clear when we are just tagging the green group here.

Honestly true_anthro might be the best compromise. It's a little vague at first but using 'true' to reinforce tag definitions is easy enough to comprehend.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
yeah maybe we just exclude the white group to make it easier after all. just give them their own sort of tag..?

Interestingly the on_model and off_model tags sort of allow searching for just official characters in the white group by coincidence. There's a chance you could use maybe a fanart tag or a tag for fanart of a non commercial / community created series but I think those other groups are good for now.

ribbons.

e6 has 2 tags for ribbons. bow ribbons and ribbons.
i feel like that should just be one fricking tag. id alias all the bow ribbons to ribbons.
bow ribbons -> ribbons
green bow ribbons -> green ribbons

this also gets confusing if youre trying to tag ribbons on a characters head.
hair_ribbon and hair_bow exist on e6. just why..
id just alias hair_bow to hair_ribbon.

the difference is so minor and i dont think these tags being split has a right to exist.
e6 solved this by making one imply the other but i dont see the point when it could all just be one tag.
with so many girl characters this is starting to become a strange issue i noticed.

wawanya said:
I wonder what /tdm/ fans think about AC characters like that. Otherwise I'm comfortable going with this convention.

yeahh the reason i want to separate them is because its so much easier finding pure tdm characters with that rule.
ac characters are often drawn taller instead of with their more tdm proportions from early games. i even saw a meme about it at one point.
on model ac is usually fine with the thread but theyre not extremely strict when it comes to proportions as long as it kinda fits the thread theme and isnt just shortstack art.
basically ac will often fall into shortstack art cause not many draw them on model and with a 1:1 rule that could at least be reduced..

tdm is one of the few threads i regularly visit. i have that thread highlighted so it appears at the top.
i could also ask the other thread goers opinion on this cause the thread is up quite often. will probably just do that but i think my basic rule idea is pretty alright.
could be added onto even if we wanted.

wawanya said:
How does that sound?

good but i think some clothings are more than one word? i cant think of many examples right now though so its probably fine. yeah sounds good.

wawanya said:
Honestly true_anthro might be the best compromise.

then lets use that for the green group at least.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
id just alias hair_bow to hair_ribbon.

the difference is so minor and i dont think these tags being split has a right to exist.
e6 solved this by making one imply the other but i dont see the point when it could all just be one tag.
with so many girl characters this is starting to become a strange issue i noticed.

I'm mostly indifferent to how we handle this. The only time this might be somewhat important to me is with the ribbons on Sylveon. Usually Sylveons just have ribbons but sometimes they have bows. Does that matter or not?
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
yeahh the reason i want to separate them is because its so much easier finding pure tdm characters with that rule.
ac characters are often drawn taller instead of with their more tdm proportions from early games. i even saw a meme about it at one point.

Yes TDM are definitely shorter to the point a new tag is best. Let's keep them separated then.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
i could also ask the other thread goers opinion on this cause the thread is up quite often. will probably just do that but i think my basic rule idea is pretty alright.

It might be fun knowing their answer. Go for it!
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
basically ac will often fall into shortstack art cause not many draw them on model and with a 1:1 rule that could at least be reduced..

The shortstack tag just kind of exploded in popularity years ago out of nowhere. Was strange to see. In fact there's also been alot of people posting that they're annoyed how common it is now and that the biggest artists who often produce it have gotten worse as a result lol.
At some point before all that the fat furries partially broke off into making their characters with other hyper proportions like tits, ass and hips to the point where that weird bimbo body shape became synonymous with the community as a whole. It feels like shortstack is another uncanny offshoot of that.

wawanya said:
I'm mostly indifferent to how we handle this. The only time this might be somewhat important to me is with the ribbons on Sylveon. Usually Sylveons just have ribbons but sometimes they have bows. Does that matter or not?

id prefer if people just use the bows_(anatomy) tag cause theyre not clothing.

wawanya said:
At some point before all that the fat furries partially broke off into making their characters with other hyper proportions like tits, ass and hips to the point where that weird bimbo body shape became synonymous with the community as a whole. It feels like shortstack is another uncanny offshoot of that.

it can be bothersome because everything is just getting more thick.
https://x.com/Kentojin50/status/1605258379848740864
not that ultra thick characters/shortstack ladies dont deserve to exist too or that big tits arent cool but is it too much to ask for some more authentic 2007 miku or similar characters.
(is that one person who likes sticks but i guess those arent in anymore.)

but yeah the furry community is pretty much only known as a fetish and furries are very accepting of everything
so it makes sense that the most associated traits with it are the most out there fetishes and hyper body parts lol.
thats just kinda how it is and i think an over consumption of lewds makes people want bigger and bigger characters to the point of hyper proportions...
which then leads to more extreme fetishes like scat.
it seems to be a sort of phenomenon people point out in furries.
have to say the difference between browsing pixiv and FA for art is crazy.
on pixiv i dont really have to filter many fetishes (if any) but on FA i definitely do.
not just cause im not into it but also cause its literally clogging up my search results which is the bigger problem.

edit: also yeah yeahhh im trying to be careful with my words cause i know i have some not wholesome fetishes
but i think another difference is the ability to enjoy regular topics like vanilla/regular proportions and sfw.

im gonna go and alias the bow tags. people could even use colors for the anatomy tag.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
id prefer if people just use the bows_(anatomy) tag cause theyre not clothing.

Great solution. I wouldn't have thought of that.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
it can be bothersome because everything is just getting more thick.
https://x.com/Kentojin50/status/1605258379848740864
not that ultra thick characters/shortstack ladies dont deserve to exist too or that big tits arent cool but is it too much to ask for some more authentic 2007 miku or similar characters.
(is that one person who likes sticks but i guess those arent in anymore.)

Wow. That example makes it really obvious. Miku doesn't seem like she needed any body alterations to make more people like her or to keep people liking her. That's a little unfortunate...
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
thats just kinda how it is and i think an over consumption of lewds makes people want bigger and bigger characters to the point of hyper proportions...

have to say the difference between browsing pixiv and FA for art is crazy.
on pixiv i dont really have to filter many fetishes (if any) but on FA i definitely do.
not just cause im not into it but also cause its literally clogging up my search results which is the bigger problem.

This feeds back into my thought about if the western furry community evolved more like the japanese one except instead of focusing of art style it's more a consideration of themes and fetishes. I like dialog and even though it's going to be lewd I wish it was more romantic and less slutty or extreme like western porn. Fewer strip clubs, dirty bathrooms and hotels, instead more dating and beautiful or comfy locations please!
That's really nice how Pixiv is alot more tame than FA. Maybe there's something to be said about the west's popufurs and leaders dragging things down a bit. No doubt Dragoneer being a fat, lazy slob served as a bad influence.

chimera / hybrid
what tag to use for monsters that are made of 2 animals?
i think chimera is bad because it should be used for creatures that are made up of several animal parts.
ive been tagging them with hybrid but youre technically supposed to use that for real life hybrids so not really ideal.

skin tone thoughts
should we count pink, orange and yellow as natural skin tones as long as theyre not extremely saturated?
saturated examples are simpsons yellow or canon frisk yellow.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
chimera / hybrid
what tag to use for monsters that are made of 2 animals?
i think chimera is bad because it should be used for creatures that are made up of several animal parts.
ive been tagging them with hybrid but youre technically supposed to use that for real life hybrids so not really ideal.

I say use hybrid for now and we can add a note about it in our documentation. Otherwise we can later go back and fix up old tags if we think of something better.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
skin tone thoughts
should we count pink, orange and yellow as natural skin tones as long as theyre not extremely saturated?
saturated examples are simpsons yellow or canon frisk yellow.

I'm comfortable with this. Artists sometimes use orange for a really deep tan, yellow is a common skin color in lower bit depth sprite art and as long as the pink doesn't differentiate the characters like the Majin in Dragon Ball such as Majin Buu then it also makes sense to tag as natural.

wawanya said:
I say use hybrid for now and we can add a note about it in our documentation. Otherwise we can later go back and fix up old tags if we think of something better.

that sounds okay. another thought would be that the tag is probably not gonna be used a lot otherwise so maybe we can just use it lol..

wawanya said:
I'm comfortable with this. Artists sometimes use orange for a really deep tan, yellow is a common skin color in lower bit depth sprite art and as long as the pink doesn't differentiate the characters like the Majin in Dragon Ball such as Majin Buu then it also makes sense to tag as natural.

yeah majin is extremely pink. thats the type of saturated i was thinking.

edit: should post 510 be used as an example of an unnatural skin tone?

wawanya said:
I like dialog and even though it's going to be lewd I wish it was more romantic and less slutty or extreme like western porn. Fewer strip clubs, dirty bathrooms and hotels, instead more dating and beautiful or comfy locations please!

i think theres a huge lack of good interactions and more romantic situations with furry content in general. i wish nsfw was more combined with that cause its mostly just nsfw or maybe something romantic if youre lucky. it might be that things like dating are also harder to tag for the masses unlike porn so that might contribute to it. that also brings me to how i want established characters to go from dating to marriage which is another thing that doesnt want to happen. its usually just the pre dating or maybe dating phase. this makes me think of nsfw games again and how my ideal nsfw game would just be a regular game like harvest moon but plus optional porn. when i look at all the people that mod regular games to have nsfw content then that might actually be some sort of untapped market lol.

age play/regression
ok so the age_regression tag is (at least on the e6 wiki) used for something entirely different than what youd think.
i think we should just use it for what comes actually to mind and is way more common. the act of regressing mentally.
some users on e6 also use it for that as well but its i guess not intended.
there is an age_play tag but thats more for specifically dressing up(??) and all types of age play which isnt just regression so it still makes sense to keep age_regression.

dronedartdrain-tc said:
should post 510 be used as an example of an unnatural skin tone?

I think so due to the other frisk_(undertale) posts having more natural skin tones even if this post more closely matches her ingame appearance. Maybe that's a good way for users to find canon skintone pics of Frisk?
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
its usually just the pre dating or maybe dating phase. this makes me think of nsfw games again and how my ideal nsfw game would just be a regular game like harvest moon but plus optional porn.

It might be a reflection on the relationship stages that most nsfw artists themselves are familiar with. There's that undertone where despite dedicating so much of their lives to sex that artists often aren't in longterm relationships or seem to have twisted depictions of what happens in them.
Still some of the highest rated works are starting to have more story, dialog, character focus and natural intimacy. Honestly if you wanted to write a solid story for a game or series basing it around the stages of first encounter, falling in love, dating, growing intimacy, attachment, marriage, having and raising children would work really well. It gives you more time to develop and focus on just 2 characters rather than having to split your resources over a harem which means your audience might care more about them too. Quite a few visual novels have done well taking that direction.
 

dronedartdrain-tc said:
the age_regression tag is (at least on the e6 wiki) used for something entirely different than what youd think.
i think we should just use it for what comes actually to mind and is way more common. the act of regressing mentally.

This stuff is mostly unfamiliar to me. I guess there's physical and mental naivety regression? Your call.