I suppose you mean a name-association to a pool search, as opposed to using pool:(number)?
(I meant the latter with my post above.)
Posted under General
Lalaca said:
An association with a pool can still be used as a search keyword.
You can't search tags in pools, besides I wasn't just referring to you, which is why I quoted both posts lol.
Mr_GT said:
Do we really need a why or what tag/pool anyway?
This implies ridding us of both the tag and a "what" pool, which I don't want to see done.
Updated by Tieria
Tieria said:
This implies ridding us of both the tag and a "what" pool.
Is there a "what" pool to get rid of in the first place?
I will admit that suggesting that we nuke the what tag wasn't a good idea, but I personally don't like the idea of adding a "why" tag/pool into the mix.
Tieria said:
Do we really need to nitpick at it as a whole?
Isn't that the whole point of this thread, to nitpick it's purpose and how to define it? What has always been ill-defined tag to me. If an uploader post something and doesn't understands what's going on within that picture, it's a what to said uploader and therefor should qualify for the what tag.
Mr_GT said:
Is there a "what" pool to get rid of in the first place?I will admit that suggesting that we nuke the what tag wasn't a good idea, but I personally don't like the idea of adding a "why" tag/pool into the mix.
Firstly, I said "a "what" pool" as in "if we were to make a pool to replace the what tag". Secondly, you brought the pool up in your post in which I was replying to. Third, Lalaca mentioned the potential pool in her reply to me also. So all in all I don't know why you're picking at that particular part of my post when the idea of a "what" pool has came up in several posts in this thread.
Isn't that the whole point of this thread, to nitpick it's purpose and how to define it? What has always been ill-defined tag to me. If an uploader post something and doesn't understands what's going on within that picture, it's a what to said uploader and therefor should qualify for the what tag.
I never said it wasn't the point of this thread, I was questioning whether or not this discussion is necessary. Is it going to clutter danbooru horribly if we leave it as it is? It just seems like a nonissue to me (well, maybe not nonissue, but a very miniscule issue).
Edit: This post isn't meant to sound snarky/mean at all, sorry if it does.
I picked your post to reply because it was the most recent posting mentioning the pool idea. I wasn't trying to start a fight or anything.
Trivial nitpicking but Lalaca was the one who brought up the idea of making the "what" tag into a pool. I was just asking if we need a pool over the tag. Don't have a problem with turning "what" into a pool myself but that still leave us with trying to define the tag/pool itself.
Soljashy said:
I dunno, pool:675 seems to work for me.
There's no way you're going to search for pool:675 unless you already know what you're looking for. And without me following that link, I have absolutely no idea what you just linked me to, either.
This is what I mean: we don't have a tag called nightmare_fuel since it's subjective, so if someone searches for that, they get zero results. But we have a pool... And in fact, we can create pools by typing pool:[name], so why not make them linkable and searchable by name? (Unless it's a processing hit of course)
uh... you CAN search them by name. pool:nightmare_fuel
But again, that's not really searching, it only works if you know it's a pool already, and you might as well just browse to the Pool part of the page at that point.
I mean typing nightmare_fuel and getting the pool as a result. Or what.
I don't like the what tag. Whether an image makes you stop whatever you're doing and leave you open-jawed is entirely dependent on how familiar you are with strange images. For example, scat play can be legitimately what for some people, but for others it's not remarkable at all.
Not to say that I want to nuke it. There just have to be a tacit understanding that this tag will never be precise. When you browse through it, you're going to see a lot of stuff you think doesn't belong in it.
That kind of thing is kinda inherent to a subjective tag, which is why we mostly got rid of them in the first place. But until pools function as tags (or at least show up as search suggestions) it's not quite an adequate replacement either...
I'd personally choose to to keep the what tag as is for now, and wait for added searchability before converting it to a pool.
葉月 said:
What I've never really understood is why pools are deemed more useful for subjective qualifiers than tags.
A possible advantage is that pools have creators, who are presumably ultimately responsible for the pool and what goes in it. With subjective tags, there's no one with the authority to make a call in the case of a disagreement.
Subjective tags are the source of endless threads... such as these, basically.
Pools don't seem to generate this kind of debate.
I wouldn't mind subjective tags either personally, but I can also see why we would choose to get rid of them, especially when cute and similar tagging horrors were going around.
That said, I agree they are too hidden right now for anyone but the most hardcore of db-users.
I don't understand why some users feel so strongly about taking what off of posts because they don't think it deserves it. It is more descriptive to have a tag than to not, and you can see it so long as you don't blacklist it.
The ruling is from years ago, but I remember albert saying tags weren't much resources, so it's better to have them than to not.
If you're searching for a post you want to show to a friend so you can both laugh at how strange it is, isn't it nice to be able to search 'what takoluka' and have it right there. Or maybe you just want to browse strange things, so you go to what, or nightmare_fuel.
It's obviously too subjective for us to come to a conclusion on. I'd just like to see the users stop fighting over it. "This isn't worthy of 'what'" is one of the most common posts I see, and usually I think 'No, that's pretty damn wtf' but pass it on because it's not really worth the attention. But when I saw the takoluka image, I felt that we really need a better resolution than to have 20+ people so sure it both is and is not 'what' worthy.
I always liked letting a tag be added if it could be useful. "If someone was browsing 'what', would they like to see this?" "If someone blacklisted what, would they like to see this?"
If they're going to continue fighting like this, I think it should be made a pool just to be consistent with the other subjective tags. I guess that's better because people can add to it, but can't delete entries? Can you have a post be in multiple pools alright? It's such a large tag there might be interference.