BUR #53757 has been rejected.
These pools too, but I'm doing them separately. These can easily be searched for with expressionless or determined. Not any different from the pools above.
Posted under General
BUR #53757 has been rejected.
These pools too, but I'm doing them separately. These can easily be searched for with expressionless or determined. Not any different from the pools above.
Knowledge_Seeker said in forum #414622:
BUR #53756 has been rejected.
nuke pool:3032
nuke pool:4470
nuke pool:782
nuke pool:2032
nuke pool:6435
nuke pool:4983
nuke pool:5172
nuke pool:2142
nuke pool:4276
nuke pool:3574This may be controversial, but the more I think about these pools, the less I think they are needed. By this point, they are little more than pet pools to be filled at leisure with whatever. All of these can easily be search for with a tag (Like "Beautiful Dark Smile" could be searched for with evil smile specifically). These are way too subjective for tags, but also suck as pools. I think it would be wise to consider killing them, or at least beginning preparations to kill them in some way.
I don’t know about this one. I feel like these have some use for finding good art you can’t find with tags.
Placeholder1996 said in forum #414632:
I don’t know about this one. I feel like these have some use for finding good art you can’t find with tags.
Hm, can you give some examples then? If these pools aren't nukable right now like you are arguing, what would people not using them as public favgroups use them for?
This'll help us step in the right direction.
Speaking from experience, I have often perused pool #782 when I wanted to find images of well-drawn hair. If that pool is gone, I think it would be harder to find images like post #5675473, post #8234005, or post #5702766. There are artists who are good at drawing hair, but they don't take up the entirety of the pool. Tags like hair spread out or hair focus wouldn't be able to cover all of the pool either. Most of the posts in the pool are long hair, but that's a much noisier search. To my argument's detriment, that pool is mostly filled by one user, so it is almost a public favgroup as you stated. I have less personal experience with the other pools in the BUR, so I have less to say about them, but I think it would also be harder to find the art in some of them with the pools gone. pool #5172 could mostly be covered by lingerie, but there would be a lot more noise in that search if you're looking for well-drawn or detailed lingerie.
Placeholder1996 said in forum #414657:
Speaking from experience, I have often perused pool #782 when I wanted to find images of well-drawn hair. If that pool is gone, I think it would be harder to find images like post #5675473, post #8234005, or post #5702766. There are artists who are good at drawing hair, but they don't take up the entirety of the pool. Tags like hair spread out or hair focus wouldn't be able to cover all of the pool either. Most of the posts in the pool are long hair, but that's a much noisier search. To my argument's detriment, that pool is mostly filled by one user, so it is almost a public favgroup as you stated. I have less personal experience with the other pools in the BUR, so I have less to say about them, but I think it would also be harder to find the art in some of them with the pools gone. pool #5172 could mostly be covered by lingerie, but there would be a lot more noise in that search if you're looking for well-drawn or detailed lingerie.
Hm...If what people are looking for is detailed hair or clothes, why not make a tag for that instead of relying on pools? Unfortunately, the flaw of that is that this sort of thing is naturally subjective, but we already have tags like bad arm, which is just as subjective, so...*shrugs*.
I think the problem with my proposal is that I proposed a unilateral nuke without giving any good alternatives, because I assumed the value of these pools have been corroded by pollution to the point of non-existence. If it's possible to fix without turning into a giant mess like many of the other pools nuked in this thread, let's do that.
A subjective pool or tag is going to be inherently messy regardless of its form (just look at armpit focus or foot focus). I don't know if there would be wide support for such blatantly subjective tags like "detailed hair" or "detailed clothes". Their creation could also be a slippery slope towards other subjective tags like "beautiful people" or "cute", so it may be better left as a pool. But if I had to choose between a subjective tag for stuff like this versus no collection at all if collection pools disappear, I might choose the tag.
Updated by Placeholder1996
Knowledge_Seeker said in forum #414622:
BUR #53756 has been rejected.
nuke pool:3032
nuke pool:4470
nuke pool:782
nuke pool:2032
nuke pool:6435
nuke pool:4983
nuke pool:5172
nuke pool:2142
nuke pool:4276
nuke pool:3574This may be controversial, but the more I think about these pools, the less I think they are needed. By this point, they are little more than pet pools to be filled at leisure with whatever. All of these can easily be search for with a tag (Like "Beautiful Dark Smile" could be searched for with evil smile specifically). These are way too subjective for tags, but also suck as pools. I think it would be wise to consider killing them, or at least beginning preparations to kill them in some way.
I've been trying to avoid touching some of these pools that aren't easily replaced by tags because I'm unsure of the expanse the feature that's going to replace collection pools is gonna be. As someone who doesn't use these pools, there's certainly some that feel more useful than others, and they way people seem to be voting right now indicates there's some feeling of wanting to keep at least some of these in the future in some way.
NiceLittleDan said in forum #414733:
I've been trying to avoid touching some of these pools that aren't easily replaced by tags because I'm unsure of the expanse the feature that's going to replace collection pools is gonna be. As someone who doesn't use these pools, there's certainly some that feel more useful than others, and they way people seem to be voting right now indicates there's some feeling of wanting to keep at least some of these in the future in some way.
Yeah that's the vibe I'm getting. I had a feeling this BUR wouldn't go much better than my attempt to nuke pool #903, but I still wanted to see if I could isolate the reoccurring element behind the downvotes, so that we can come to a better solution.
The reoccurring thread I've found so far is that there is something desirable in these pools that make people hesitant to get rid of them. But alas, we end up in a very troubling problem where these pools are too subjective to convert to a tag, but not subjective enough people want to get rid of them.
I think the pools' age definitely plays a role in it too, but I wanna focus on the aspects that people can come to an agreement on.
The bulk update request #51848 (forum #403392) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
The bulk update request #52118 (forum #404677) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.
The bulk update request #52118 (forum #404677) has been approved by @evazion.
BUR #54421 has been approved by @evazion.
nuke pool:18742
This pool should be a character tag and in fact is a character tag. Thus it is pointless.
NiceLittleDan said in forum #414591:
I think anything that is an actual pose or routine is better off having the name of the pose or routine instead.
Knowledge_Seeker said in forum #414595:
Having tags for various poses works a lot better, unless someone more knowledgeable on ballet can successfully argue for tag conversion instead.
The problem with just relying on the tags for various poses is that half the art depicting them depicts them being done wrong (or, at least, really poorly lol). A lot of posts tagged arabesque (pose) technically are attempts at drawing an arabesque, but the specifics are off. The limb placements are wonky, the feet aren't pointed correctly, or the hands are posed strangely. For anyone not super into ballet, it's perfectly fine, but if you want to find well done ballet in the ballet tag, it can take some scouring.
The bulk update request #54421 (forum #416928) has been approved by @evazion.
pipirupirupirupipirupi said in forum #417018:
The problem with just relying on the tags for various poses is that half the art depicting them depicts them being done wrong (or, at least, really poorly lol). A lot of posts tagged arabesque (pose) technically are attempts at drawing an arabesque, but the specifics are off. The limb placements are wonky, the feet aren't pointed correctly, or the hands are posed strangely. For anyone not super into ballet, it's perfectly fine, but if you want to find well done ballet in the ballet tag, it can take some scouring.
Make a tag for it then. It's analogous to tags like accurate lolita coord, traditional nun, traditional halo, or miko vs nontraditional miko, where we have tags for when things are done accurately rather than in a stylized way.
BUR #54462 has been approved by @nonamethanks.
convert pool:28135 -> accurate_ballet
create implication accurate_ballet -> ballet
Alternate proposal for this pool. There's never been anything wrong with tags for accurate/traditional portrayals, especially if it is rarer than incorrect examples.
The bulk update request #52390 (forum #408433) has been rejected by @DanbooruBot.