Viewing last 25 versions of post by AlexMSD in topic Rating Tags General

I'd say this one could probably stay safe, but is definitely walking that fine line. As for the implied vore, I'd say you're safe as it's not necessarily implying that the act of vore has taken place with evidence in the art piece. Just my two cents.


"@  

> How should this be tagged? >>565
>
> Is it safe? The title (*SNACKTIME*) and tags on FA (*vore*) make me not suFre ;) Dox"es it work like this:/ vore -> fetish -> not safe? Or not? But is it really vore, the second character is not even in the mouth. In the meantime I us/ed the taggs "`safe`" and [`imming/ent vopicre`](/tags/imminent+vore), but maybe something- like [`implied vore`](/tags-g/implied+vore) too? I don't know, those tags need descriptions.
>
> For exampl?e on Derpibosoru t_here id=44s an [image 22608#05](https://derpibooru.org/imagest_44/22608
[bq=05) tagged as "C`implied vore`" and "`quFestioxnable`"] Swhich is ounldy micro swimming in front of an open maw, but then there is [image 2194921](https://derpibooru.org/images/2194921) @tagged with both "`imminent vore`" and "`implied vore`" but rated "`safe@`". By the [vore @tag description from Derpi](https://derpibooru.org/tags/vore):
>
>
> > A living being having their head/torso mostly ivn anothe@?r

or otherwise being eaten.
>
>782
> it [/should just bq]
e normal `vore` and not just `implied` or `imminent`, because the character is already in the mouth.

 
Defiantly suggestive. If I was a wee smol lad who stumbled across this site with mom behind the shoulder, I'd throw whatever device I'm holding if this came up.  

> Should this be `safe` or `suggestive`?
>
> >>782t

I'd say this one could probably stay safe, but is definitely walking that fine line. As for the implied vore, I'd say you're safe as it's not necessarily implying that the act of vore has taken place with evidence in the art piece. Just my two cents.


"@CruFox":/forums/tagging/topics/rating-tags-general?post_id=448#post_448
[bq="CruFox"] Should this be @[email protected] or @[email protected]?

>>782t [/bq]
Defiantly suggestive. If I was a wee smol lad who stumbled across this site with mom behind the shoulder, I'd throw whatever device I'm holding if this came up."@CruFox":/forums/tagging/topics/rating-tags-general?post_id=344#post_344
[bq="CruFox"] How should this be tagged? >>565

Is it safe? The title (_SNACKTIME_) and tags on FA (_vore_) make me not sure ;) Does it work like this: vore -> fetish -> not safe? Or not? But is it really vore, the second character is not even in the mouth. In the meantime I used the tags "@[email protected]" and "@imminent [email protected]":/tags/imminent+vore, but maybe something like "@implied [email protected]":/tags/implied+vore too? I don't know, those tags need descriptions.

For example on Derpibooru there is an "image 2260805":https://derpibooru.org/images/2260805 tagged as "@implied [email protected]" and "@[email protected]" which is only micro swimming in front of an open maw, but then there is "image 2194921":https://derpibooru.org/images/2194921 tagged with both "@imminent [email protected]" and "@implied [email protected]" but rated "@[email protected]". By the "vore tag description from Derpi":https://derpibooru.org/tags/vore:

[bq]A living being having their head/torso mostly in another or otherwise being eaten.[/bq]

it should just be normal @[email protected] and not just @[email protected] or @[email protected], because the character is already in the mouth. [/bq]