hiroimo2, you're still adding breasts to naked characters...

moonian said:
hiroimo2, you're still adding breasts to naked characters...

As I mentioned in my previous comment, I pointed out that pictures with the naked tag do not necessarily contain breasts. There are many, for example post #876334 and post #892969. I think that breasts and naked should be separated.
Do I still have to remove the breasts?
If that's the rule, does that mean that if a picture with ass is also naked, the ass tag should be removed? I think that would be very inconvenient. What do you think about it?

hiroimo2 said:
As I mentioned in my previous comment, I pointed out that pictures with the naked tag do not necessarily contain breasts. There are many, for example post #876334 and post #892969. I think that breasts and naked should be separated.
Do I still have to remove the breasts?
If that's the rule, does that mean that if a picture with ass is also naked, the ass tag should be removed? I think that would be very inconvenient. What do you think about it?

Yes, you have to, as, compared with other Danbooru-like sites, the definition of breasts here is different from them.

And you're comparing apples and oranges, as ass doesn't have such explicit tagging limitations as breasts.

(I thought you should've already known all about these already, seeing that you've been contributing here for quite some years?)

moonian said:
Yes, you have to, as, compared with other Danbooru-like sites, the definition of breasts here is different from them.

And you're comparing apples and oranges, as ass doesn't have such explicit tagging limitations as breasts.

(I thought you should've already known all about these already, seeing that you've been contributing here for quite some years?)

No, I didn't know that.
It seems like an unnecessary rule.
What is the reason for this rule?

You told me that I was comparing different things in breasts and ass, but I mentioned it because I want you to understand that if this rule is doing so because naked contains breasts, that is not right. If it's for a different reason, please let me know.

And if this is an unnecessary rule, I'd like to see it changed.
My wish is that the tags become useful.
Thank you.

hiroimo2 said:
And if this is an unnecessary rule, I'd like to see it changed.
My wish is that the tags become useful.
Thank you.

Nope, the rule is useful as it is, as it helps maintaining one of this site's main rules - to keep General-typed tags as minimum and simple as possible (hence the "compared with other Danbooru-like sites, the definition of breasts here is different from them" bit).

So, no, the tag's current definition is here to stay.

For me, breasts tag is for big boobed ones...
Some pics show naked characters without expose breasts or ass like this one post #895763
I think breasts tag must be mentioned too with naked model... ;)

emtec said:
For me, breasts tag is for big boobed ones...
Some pics show naked characters without expose breasts or ass like this one post #895763
I think breasts tag must be mentioned too with naked model... ;)

I think I know why this argument started in the first place now - someone reverted that wiki page to a very old edition last year, causing the definition became unclear.

It's now reverted to the correct edition (also locked just in case) to reflect what the tag really does:

This tag is not used the same way as Danbooru uses it. Danbooru instead uses a breasts_outside tag. Please use this tag in the same manner.

Which means (from the link above) a character needs to have upper clothing in the first place to reach the condition that the tag can be added.

Case closed.

I agree with emtec. It makes no sense not to use breasts with naked. I understand it's to avoid double tagging, but it's just dumb. If breasts are visible on the image, breasts should be tagged.

dick_dickinson said:
I agree with emtec. It makes no sense not to use breasts with naked. I understand it's to avoid double tagging, but it's just dumb. If breasts are visible on the image, breasts should be tagged.

Please refer to my comment above.

moonian said:
Please refer to my comment above.

That doesn't mean I have to agree with the comment above. Only that I have to comply.

dick_dickinson said:
That doesn't mean I have to agree with the comment above. Only that I have to comply.

Well, I thought you posted your comment before reading mine. Looks like this isn't the case, then :D

moonian said:
Well, I thought you posted your comment before reading mine. Looks like this isn't the case, then :D

I did, your comment wasn't there when I posted mine, but it didn't change how I think about it :)

dick_dickinson said:
I did, your comment wasn't there when I posted mine, but it didn't change how I think about it :)

Ah, I see :D

moonian said:
Nope, the rule is useful as it is, as it helps maintaining one of this site's main rules - to keep General-typed tags as minimum and simple as possible (hence the "compared with other Danbooru-like sites, the definition of breasts here is different from them" bit).

So, no, the tag's current definition is here to stay.

Thanks for the answer.
I understand to want to keep it to a minimum. I don't want it to be like Danbooru. Don't have to increase the types of tags. What I wanted to say was that this is a strange rule that breasts, naked, and topless together, and I would like to changed.
You wouldn't put ass, naked and bottomless together, would you? I just want the same thing.
I think it's a win-win proposition: Users will find the search more convenient, and you will have less trouble deleting breasts.
Would you still accept this proposal?

@hiroimo2, please refer to the comment I left (a few entries after what you quoted) here: https://yande.re/post/show/900903#c208988

That's why "breasts" can't be added to naked or topless characters.

hiroimo2 said:
Thanks for the answer.
I understand to want to keep it to a minimum. I don't want it to be like Danbooru.

Keeping tags to a minimum is fine as long as it won't inhibit one's ability to list posts specific to their interest. That's where yande.re lacks a bit. For certain topics there are half a dozen tags for very similar things for others there is one umbrella tag for things where specific tags could be useful.

moonian said:
That's why "breasts" can't be added to naked or topless characters.

In same nipples can't be added to naked or topless one ;)
So, i think...

emtec said:
In same nipples can't be added to naked or topless one ;)
So, i think...

AFAIK, "breasts" is the only tag that gets such special treatments. So, not the same.

moonian said:
@hiroimo2, please refer to the comment I left (a few entries after what you quoted) here: https://yande.re/post/show/900903#c208988

That's why "breasts" can't be added to naked or topless characters.

Thanks for the answer. I'll say no more. I will follow the rules.

In a way, it's nice to upload right away than to meet a tag quota before being allowed to do so.