The "bb" tag needs some reorganization

1) It should not be "bb". The tag should be "big_breasts", with the shorthand "bb" as an alias, like for all other tags.

2) "big_breasts" is a poor idea for a tag, anyway. Currently it ranges from "normal" big breasts to horribly deformed stuff like post #163076 or post #164060. Where is the use in that?
Let's try dividing the user base in three groups:

a) People who only like small or tiny breasts. To them, even a C cup is too large, so they end up tagging all largish breasts with "bb" (presumably so that they can search for "-bb"). But these people are already well served by the "flat_chest" tag (and "small_breasts", etc.), so there really is no need for them to tag the complementary set. Therefore, and considering that their perception is quite different from the average person's, I think they should refrain from tagging things with "big_breasts".

b) People who like breasts. It is normal for human males to be attracted to breasts (they are a sign of fertility, etc. - it doesn't matter why men like breasts, let's just accept that they usually do). These people will appreciate a search for "breasts" when they want to look at a nice pair. Small, medium, large, it's all good; in fact, people who like breasts usually display a preference for big ones. However, there is such as thing as "too much of a good thing": the average person doesn't want to look at deformed bodies and bloated balloons of fat. Therefore, it would be useful to have a tag for "grotesquely large udders" so they can be excluded from a search.

c) Finally, there are people who have a "huge breast" fetish and get off on stuff like post #163728. These people would be well-served by the same "grotesquely large udders" tag as before - they'd search for it instead of excluding it, but the set would be the same.

Now, we need to define how large is too large. Some people might say "larger than a D cup", or "unrealistically large"; while this might seem reasonable at first, we need to remember that this is a collection of anime-style drawings, not photographs. The normal proportions of an anime figure are quite different from those of a flesh-and-bones woman: longer legs, larger head, larger eyes, smaller mouth, thinner waist, etc. Making a direct comparison between anime breasts and real breasts is impossible: you get widely different sizes depending on which measure you take as the base (head size? waist size?).

For example, the wiki article on "bb" references post #154842. But in the anime style, those correspond to "normal large" breasts, not "huge" ones. It doesn't make sense to lump them in the same category as post #165533.

Therefore, I propose these changes:
1) No more "bb" tag.
2) A new "huge_breasts" (or "bloated_breasts"? You can suggest other names) tag for really oversize breasts, using a criterion based on normal anime proportions (*not* real life proportions).

Honestly, I'm somewhat indifferent about the bb tag itself. However, I do think there should be a tag for the XBOX HUEG breasts seen in things like post #165533 or post #163076.
Also, "grotesquely huge udders" is hilarious.

I agree.

I see too many posts here tagged as bb when they don't necessarily fit the description. The only problem is how subjective the tag gets. Like you said, people who prefer flat chests will tend to label "normal" breasts with the bb tag.

It's difficult to figure out a solution for this issue but I hope it gets resolved.

Yeah, not the easiest tag to deal with.

If you consider image boards or threads based on "bb", you will often see things more along the lines of breasts larger than watermelons rather than F-cups.

---------------
Flatchest tag - "american A-cup or less"
Breasts tag - B to ? cup

The range of the "breasts" tag might be as much of a problem as the "bb" tag.

Well, that first was pretty hostile. We can easily tell which of those three groups LaC is in and thinks everyone else should be too.

Meanwhile over here, I blacklist the bb tag and don't tag things like C cup breasts as bb - only breasts larger than the character's head, which I think is a good enough cutoff point as any. When I suggested that criterion and referenced post #154842 I said that it had breasts too small to be considered bb, so anything smaller definitely wasn't bb, not that it itself was bb (whoever wrote the wiki entry / retagged that image had a different opinion, obviously).

(checking now I believe my other sugested cutoff point was post #154918, which I said should be bb and is a bit larger than the cutoff point but still definitely on the small end of the tag. but I still don't know what comment thread I suggested those in. and now, as then, I'm restoring my bb blacklist now.)

If you think "normal" large breasts include stuff like http://blog82.fc2.com/c/chocors/file/ea5.jpg then I'm sorry to disappoint you but that's not normal and never will be. It might be smaller than the subset of bb -you- don't want to see but it's still bb.

And yes, bb should alias to big_breasts or huge_breasts or something, so new posters use it correctly (which I also suggested when I gave suggestions for cutoff points).

I don't exactly see why 'breasts' should be mutually exclusive of either 'flat_chest' or 'bb' since they both in fact imply breasts. The only reason I can see to make them exclusive is to allow a search for "normal breasts" without needing multiple tags and negations, but that's not exactly a technically accurate way to do things.

I thought it was used alternatively as a way to filter girls with larger breasts than usually.

why don't you just create a bigger_than_head tag. I'll edit my posts

Well, 'breasts' and 'flat_chest' are only used for pictures with bare chest, but 'bb' has been used even if the girl is wearing clothes, so an implication wouldn't be appropriate. And the first two seem pretty mutually exclusive to me.

Boco said:
Well, 'breasts' and 'flat_chest' are only used for pictures with bare chest, but 'bb' has been used even if the girl is wearing clothes, so an implication wouldn't be appropriate. And the first two seem pretty mutually exclusive to me.

That is untrue. Flat chest means flat chest, not bare flat chest. Breasts get added when they are important/focal in the pic, no matter their clothedness. Probably not everyone is following this system, but I know I am.

ePlus said:
I see too many posts here tagged as bb when they don't necessarily fit the description. The only problem is how subjective the tag gets. Like you said, people who prefer flat chests will tend to label "normal" breasts with the bb tag.

I think the "bb" monicker itself causes much confusion.

ceecee said:
Flatchest tag - "american A-cup or less"
Breasts tag - B to ? cup

The range of the "breasts" tag might be as much of a problem as the "bb" tag.

"Breasts" is not about the size, it just indicates posts where breasts are given prominent display.

Boco said:
Well, that first was pretty hostile.

That was not my intention at all. From the tone of your reply, it seems that you felt targeted somehow, but rest assured, I don't even know who you are. I do appreciate your input, though.

Meanwhile over here, I blacklist the bb tag and don't tag things like C cup breasts as bb - only breasts larger than the character's head, which I think is a good enough cutoff point as any.

It seems that we're in agreement.

If you think "normal" large breasts include stuff like http://blog82.fc2.com/c/chocors/file/ea5.jpg

Those seem too large, although it's hard to get an accurate estimate from that angle. Anyway, that post would be rejected for lowres.

Shinjidude said:
I don't exactly see why 'breasts' should be mutually exclusive of either 'flat_chest' or 'bb' since they both in fact imply breasts.

I wasn't suggesting that. The breasts tag should remain as it is.

animeboy12 said:
why don't you just create a bigger_than_head tag. I'll edit my posts

That doesn't say what is bigger than the head, but I think I'll put that criterion in the wiki page.

葉月 said:
That is untrue. Flat chest means flat chest, not bare flat chest. Breasts get added when they are important/focal in the pic, no matter their clothedness. Probably not everyone is following this system, but I know I am.

That's how I understand them as well, although in practice those definitions make it unlikely that the same girl can fit both criteria. For instance, post #157353 is flat_chest and topless, but it shouldn't be tagged with "breasts".

LaC said:
That was not my intention at all. From the tone of your reply, it seems that you felt targeted somehow, but rest assured, I don't even know who you are. I do appreciate your input, though.

Not your intent, except that from reading the first post you split the userbase into 3 sections, "ignorant fanatics", "completely normal people like me", and "guro fucktards".

LaC said:
Those seem too large, although it's hard to get an accurate estimate from that angle. Anyway, that post would be rejected for lowres.

I found that on Google image search to give an example of breasts which would take the bb tag. When did I ever say this picture should be on the site?

Long and short of it: Your idea is stupid. The bb tag should be renamed and should continue to be used for what it's always been used for - preventing me from seeing images I don't like - and if you want to see some bb images but not other bb images, you should try to find some other tag to blacklist.

Boco said:
...Your idea is stupid. The bb tag should be renamed and should continue to be used for what it's always been used for - preventing me from seeing images I don't like...

I probably shouldn't say anything, since I don't want to perpetuate a flame war, but you called LaC hostile, and then you acted the same as he did.

Also, I think it's a bit arrogant to say that a tag's definition should be solely to serve your own purposes. By that logic everyone would have their own definition of what it *should* do, and will end up contradicting other people.

It's best to clearly define a logical boundary and use that as the official definition. I would use 'bb' for the same reasons you do, but it would serve us both better if that tag was being used consistently.

Shinjidude said:
It's best to clearly define a logical boundary and use that as the official definition.

I'm pretty sure that's already been done (ref: "breasts bigger than xxxx / smaller than xxxx"). If certain users are still misusing the tag then make comments, reports, or mails about it.

This thread was created because LaC wants to see -some- bb images but not others, but that doesn't mean bb is a bad tag and should be redefined to suit his (and only his) purposes, it just means he should campaign for a new tag that implies it (if he wants that blacklist).

Boco said:
Not your intent, except that from reading the first post you split the userbase into 3 sections, "ignorant fanatics", "completely normal people like me", and "guro fucktards".

Enough with the persecution complex, please. It's getting tiresome.

I found that on Google image search to give an example of breasts which would take the bb tag. When did I ever say this picture should be on the site?

The point is that you have yet to show an image on danbooru where we disagree on whether it should be tagged with "bb". From what you've said in this thread so far, we seem to have very close ideas about it.

Long and short of it: Your idea is stupid. The bb tag should be renamed and should continue to be used for what it's always been used for - preventing me from seeing images I don't like - and if you want to see some bb images but not other bb images, you should try to find some other tag to blacklist.

I guess I can see why you're so agitated: you were offended because I didn't treat your favorite fetish with sufficient tact, and you're worried that your precious blacklist is going to get disturbed. On the latter count, I don't think you have any reason to worry; as for the former, you're just going to have to get over it.

Anyway, all these personal attacks are inappropriate. If you need to vent off steam, you should contact me on IRC instead of derailing forum threads with your misguided animosity.

Shinjidude said:
It's best to clearly define a logical boundary and use that as the official definition. I would use 'bb' for the same reasons you do, but it would serve us both better if that tag was being used consistently.

The point of this thread is precisely to discuss a way to resolve the inconsistent use of the "bb" tag. Currently it's full of false positives, although those who have it blacklisted only ever notice the false negatives.
Incidentally, I don't blacklist this tag myself, nor do I plan to once it's fixed. All I want is consistent tagging that's useful to as many people as possible.

葉月 said:
That is untrue. Flat chest means flat chest, not bare flat chest. Breasts get added when they are important/focal in the pic, no matter their clothedness. Probably not everyone is following this system, but I know I am.

This is also how I always used those tags.

searching bb currently brings me to a "did you mean..." screen (which puzzlingly includes the bb tag). My blacklist has been cleared since I learned it causes so much stress on the system, so that can't be it. Has it been aliased as something? Is an alias supposed to forward to the new "correct" tag?

Anyway, I think BB is HUEG LIKE XBOX, "bigger than head" isn't even big enough for me to tag it bb. It has to be bigger than THAT still. But then again, I don't hate (or care for) bb, so it's not really something I have a strong opinion about.

surasshu said:
searching bb currently brings me to a "did you mean..." screen (which puzzlingly includes the bb tag). My blacklist has been cleared since I learned it causes so much stress on the system, so that can't be it. Has it been aliased as something? Is an alias supposed to forward to the new "correct" tag?

I have mass-edited "bb" to "huge_breasts", since that change was uncontroversial. There are no aliases in place yet; I don't think "bb" should be aliased to "huge_breasts", and I'd rather it just remain empty.
That's because the acronym automatically makes one think of "big breasts" (actually, the first thing I thought was "Brigitte Bardot", but once you know it's a breasts tag...), which is definitely not what the tag means. For example, I'd say the ones in post #166443 are "big breasts", but I doubt anybody would want to put the "huge_breasts" tag on that picture.

As for the cached post counts, they'll be updated during the daily maintenance.
If you had a "bb" blacklist before, just replace it with "huge_breasts".

LaC said:
Enough with the persecution complex, please. It's getting tiresome.

Your first post.
"To them, even a C cup is too large, so they end up tagging all largish breasts with "bb" [...] their perception is quite different from the average person's".
"It is normal for human males to be attracted to breasts [...] in fact, people who like breasts usually display a preference for big ones."
"Finally, there are people who have a "huge breast" fetish and get off on stuff like post #163728. These people would be well-served by the same "grotesquely large udders" tag"

LaC said:
The point is that you have yet to show an image on danbooru where we disagree on whether it should be tagged with "bb". From what you've said in this thread so far, we seem to have very close ideas about it.

Then I fail to see a need for this topic. It seems to me like you're saying "I want to see half of the pictures in the bb tag, but not the other half, so I'm going to get rid of it and replace it with a tag where only breasts the size of televisions get tagged so I don't have to look at them, but can look at these watermelon sized ones". If you're not saying that, then the problem isn't resolved with changing how the tag is -already- reccomended to be used, it's in enforcing that reccomendation (by informing/reprimanding users who mistag).

Since you don't seem to be meaning what I read you as meaning I'll stop making noise here. I still am completely lost at what this thread is meant to accomplish if it isn't what I said above, but I don't have to understand it for you to be able to do it.

Boco said:
Your first post.

My prose is a bit colorful; some like it, some don't. Please try not to get so distracted by a post's tone that you don't see what it actually says. I was not dividing the user base in three groups to send two of them to Auschwitz, but to study use cases for tags in order to take everyone's needs into account.

If you're not saying that, then the problem isn't resolved with changing how the tag is -already- reccomended to be used, it's in enforcing that reccomendation (by informing/reprimanding users who mistag).

I don't think repression can substitute good planning. When mistagging is rampant (and, by any of the proposed definitions, it was), it means that there are concrete factors that make it difficult for people to understand and use the tag consistently. Like I said, the name itself was one of them (fixed); the vagueness of the wiki definition was another (still unfixed). If the recommendation you're referring to is http://danbooru.donmai.us/wiki/show?title=bb&version=9 , then it was woefully inadequate.

Now, I'd like to get back to discussing a new definition for the "huge_breasts" tag, one with a more clear-cut threshold. "Larger than the head" has been mentioned multiple times: does anybody have objections against using that?