*_behind_* tags

There's some confusion running around here it seems.

While I can tell the difference between hand_behind_head and hands_behind_head (i.e. the number of hands), the difference between hands_behind_head and arms_behind_head evades me. And from the posts it's really all the same.
So I guess it deserves some aliasing in one way or another.

Same goes with hands_behind_back and arms_behind.
I can imagine a slight difference in posture, but the current posts don't take it into account either.
Thoughts?

(Not talking about the infamous from_behind tag 'cause I can't even think what to do to with it right now.)

I made arms_behind_head because I didn't realize hands_behind_head existed. They should be aliased one direction or another.

As for hands_behind_back vs. arms_behind, I suggest aliasing them both to arms_behind_back. I think it's best to make explicit what arms_behind is talking about, rather than leaving it implicit. The from_behind tag demonstrates why it's a bad idea in general to leave things implicit.

The distinction between from_behind, and from_above or from_below has been pointed out before. The paradigm doesn't exactly follow between it and the other two.

EDIT: Actually according to the wiki, that has changed, though I'm not sure I've seen it from actual use. In addition to the viewpoint being "from behind" there seems to also always be another "behind" in view.

My point was that from_behind leaves it ambiguous as to whether it means sex from behind or a view from behind, and as a consequence it's used in both ways. The meaning was changed in forum #16284, but really it doesn't matter how you define a tag in the wiki; people will still use it based on whatever they think it means from the name.

arms_behind isn't as bad, but there's still some ambiguity in the meaning. Are the arms behind the back? The head? Something else? It's better just to make it explicit.

I completely agree with you. In addition to the ambiguity, changing the definition of a tag with a previously well-established (and different) use, is pretty much destined to fail. People tend not to even look at the wikis unless they don't have a clue how it should be used.

So I guess we agree on:
- hands_behind_head → arms_behind_head
- hands_behind_back → arms_behind_back
- arms_behind → arms_behind_back
for now?

The slight difference between arms/hands behind back bothers me a little but I guess no one's ever gonna pay attention to that anyway.

evazion said:
I made arms_behind_head because I didn't realize hands_behind_head existed. They should be aliased one direction or another.
As for hands_behind_back vs. arms_behind, I suggest aliasing them both to arms_behind_back. I think it's best to make explicit what arms_behind is talking about, rather than leaving it implicit.

Agree on both counts.

Guess I'll go with arms_behind_*, but either works.

I don't really want to continue the derail but I don't feel like making another thread/bumping an ancient one. It may not be the optimal solution for the from* tags as it adds even more characters to yet another tag but maybe changing them all to view_from_behind/above/below + writing a wiki for from_behind disambiguating the two conflicting ideas on the tag so there's no question that someone has the wrong tag when their image is the only one in it could sort them all out.

Self necro.

How about from_back for non-sexual posts currently using from_behind?
I think it fits better for a single character pose, and this way people can safely keep on misusing from_behind for sexual content only.

But people also use from_behind for non-sexual content, and will keep using it that way even if we try to define it for only sexual content.

I would tend to agree that nuking from_behind in some fashion (either migrating its current content and blanking it or directly aliasing it into a more unambiguous term) is probably the only way to completely prevent misuse. I don't know whether that's necessary or worth it, but without that, people will keep misusing it.