Animal on x implications

Posted under Tags

voiceofthecold

BUR #41221 has been rejected.

create implication animal_on_shoulder -> animal
create implication animal_on_head -> animal
create implication animal_on_lap -> animal
create implication animal_on_arm -> animal
create implication animal_on_hand -> animal
create implication animal_on_leg -> animal

These tags indicate scenarios involving animals, similarly to the already implied animal_on_chest and animal_on_back tags.

Reply
Unbreakable CommentaryRequest Zalza
Zalza

voiceofthecold said:

BUR #41221 has been rejected.

create implication animal_on_shoulder -> animal
create implication animal_on_head -> animal
create implication animal_on_lap -> animal
create implication animal_on_arm -> animal
create implication animal_on_hand -> animal
create implication animal_on_leg -> animal

These tags indicate scenarios involving animals, similarly to the already implied animal_on_chest and animal_on_back tags.

To avoid a quadrillion pokemon/digimon/pal/etc on (body part) tag people often use animal on x for such posts and we don't want don't implying animal.

Reply
voiceofthecold

Zalza said:

To avoid a quadrillion pokemon/digimon/pal/etc on (body part) tag people often use animal on x for such posts and we don't want don't implying animal.

That is a fair point, as is the argument against the implications given in the previous topic. Though I feel like it'd make sense to unimply animal_on_back and animal_on_chest then both because it's inconsistent as is, and as mentioned there's the problem with animal getting tagged onto images involving pokemon etc.

Reply
1