Posted under General
Pool to tag: pool #1674 -> happy_facial
Tag implication: happy_facial -> facial
Tag implication: happy_facial -> happy_sex
Details:
A happy facial is just "happy sex" in the form of a "facial". Logically, all members of that pool should be tagged happy sex and facial simultaneously.
(The tag happy sex specifically allows any sexual act, including facials, blowjobs, paizuris, etc.)
Updated by jxh2154
If they're all going to be tagged with happy_sex and facial, you wouldn't need a happy_facial tag, just search happy_sex facial.
jjj14 said:
If they're all going to be tagged with happy_sex and facial, you wouldn't need a happy_facial tag, just search happy_sex facial.
Yes, that works.
However, I stand by what I said: happy_facial is a great, intuitive, self-explanatory shortcut to the other tags.
Not all people are going to recognize quickly that happy_sex includes facials, but everyone will know instantly that happy_facial includes facials, just by reading the name of the tag.
Well, you're always going to have some images in a tag search that are not 100% the thing you're looking for. For example, if I said, "I want to see pictures of waitresses with glasses", then I search waitress glasses, some pictures like post #946837 have a waitress and someone else with glasses. But I don't think it's a huge hassle to scan the thumbnails for the ones where the waitress wears glasses. I mean, we could make an waitress_with_glasses tag, but it just seems unnecessary to me.
This goes back to the whole combo tag / nested tag issue again. Basically if the combination is what's important a combo tag is needed (until and unless nested tags are implemented which may very well never happen). Having billions of combo tags is not a great idea either though.
jjj14 said:
Well, you're always going to have some images in a tag search that are not 100% the thing you're looking for. For example, if I said, "I want to see pictures of waitresses with glasses", then I search waitress glasses, some pictures like post #946837 have a waitress and someone else with glasses. But I don't think it's a huge hassle to scan the thumbnails for the ones where the waitress wears glasses. I mean, we could make an waitress_with_glasses tag, but it just seems unnecessary to me.
I agree with you. JackyHF's justification to have happy_facial is not convincing.
However, I stand by what I said before: Creating that intuitive and self-explanatory combo tag is a great idea.
If it's a specific enough thing to get it's own pool I don't see why it wouldn't be able to get it's own tag. It's a very objective and easy to spot thing.
That said, I think happy_sex facial supplements the pool pretty well in the first place. So, either way, it doesn't need to be a pool.
OK; I maintain my point of view that happy_facial — implicating happy_sex and facial, simultaneously — is more convenient. The search happy_sex+facial is too technical; it's true, but not much intuitive.
Notably, most images of happy facials are tagged facial, but not happy_sex.
Since almost nobody in this old discussion is defending the pool (we are mostly discussing tags instead), I am using happy_facial these days, when I find new instances of it. It's easier to me, this way.
Danielx21 said:
Since almost nobody in this old discussion is defending the pool (we are mostly discussing tags instead), I am using happy_facial these days, when I find new instances of it. It's easier to me, this way.
Please don't do stuff like that. Wait until an actual decision has been made then follow through with said decision. I've moved everything under that tag to the pool for the time being.
ShadowbladeEdge said:
Please don't do stuff like that. Wait until an actual decision has been made then follow through with said decision. I've moved everything under that tag to the pool for the time being.
OK; I'll do what you said. Thanks for merging everything together.
I never used the funcion "Import" to pools, but I hope you didn't have to add each post to the pool manually, individually, because it would sound more troublesome.
jxh2154 said:
happy_facial is okay in theory, I just don't want slippery_slope tagging to happy_anal, happy_blowjob, happy-handjob etc etc etc.
I'm not finding the exact words to say what I mean for this message, but I'll try... I, too, would oppose happy_anal and happy_handjob; because these would merely be collections of different things together. It would be like creating these two tags:
Whereas happy_facial is basically a face tag: it means "A face that is both happy and covered in cum." So, as I said before, I support this tag.
Following that reasoning, in the future I might support an additional happy_blowjob ("a girl who is happy while sucking a dick") if, and only if, I discover that the new tag has some other merits (such as listing images that would be otherwise difficult to find through the simple search happy blowjob). Apparently, it doesn't have, (but could in the future; I don't know) so as a result I currently oppose happy_blowjob too.
EDIT:
Some wording.
Updated
dean_exia said:
Why don't you just use the tags happy + blowjob, facial, sex, etc
Would you use happy + facial? I already gave reasons in favor of happy facial, including:
Updated
