guided_breast_grab implication issue

Posted under Tags

BUR #15302 has been rejected.

remove implication guided_breast_grab -> breast_grab

While this implication makes 99% of the time, unfortunately we also have to deal with imminent_breast_grab combinations - post #1704496 and post #5597359 are guided_breast_grabs, but they're not breast_grab. As such, the implication has a problem that needs fixing.

Option one: we remove the implication, meaning we likely end up with dozens of untagged breast_grab posts within months.

Option two: we dance around the issue entirely and make a new tag specifically for this scenario, guided_imminent_breast_grab. However, given how small and niche it would be, users would likely have no idea it even exists and keep tagging it as guided_breast_grab, meaning we still end up with mistags (albeit not nearly as many). Ideally it'd imply imminent_breast_grab, but I'm not sure we have enough posts for that right now.

I'll provide a BUR for both scenarios.