Posts

Here is list of tags that I think should have a descriptions but I’m nut sure what this description should be or even what some of the tags here are for, so I can’t write them myself:
 
winking vs vulvar winking vs one eye closed - differences between those  
partial nudity - is this just common tag for bottomless and toples? And what about wardrobe malfunction?  
shipping - currently no description, should this be the same as on Derpi?  
speech bubble vs dialogue vs talking  
eeveelution - this needs a description to clarify what this is  
bra - does parts of bikini covering breasts count as this?  
And whats the difference between lingerie, panties and underwear? All should have a description.  
watermark - what’s a difference between this and a signature? If the watermark is just the artist name but written in semi-transparent capital letters is it signature and watermark at the same time?
 
grin vs smiling vs happy - differences?
 
fluffy - what is this exactly, it’s implied only by fluffy tail
 
intersex - this is an important tag so it needs a description
 
Why there is a tag called love heart but also another one called heart?
 
teats vs nipples vs breasts vs udders - descriptions needed for all
 
There is also tack, and from the implications (bridle, harness, lead) I could guess that it is meant to be this:
 

 

 
but harness on a parachutist or somebody who climbs mountains is not really connected to riding horses, so tack should not be implied by harness.
 
By the way on e621 there is a tag called bondage gear but it’s not implied by anything. You can use all the things used for bondage in a “normal” way after all.
 
EDIT: Why does hotdogging implies intercrural sex?
 
Hotdogging description from Derpibooru is:  

When a male rubs his penis between another male or female’s butt cheeks without penetrating the anus.

Intercrural sex (from inter- and Latin crura, “legs”), also known as femoral/interfemoral sex, is a type of non-penetrative sex, where the penis is placed between the receiving partner’s thighs (often with lubrication) and thrusts to create friction.

There’s less of a reason to make a distinction between media-originated characters and someone’s fursona here than at derpi, and the lines are a bit murkier here.

or the Xenomorph

1. the name was composited of first and last name and they sounded original enough  
2. in the cases where owner name was the same as character name.  
   I am also trying to always check if there is a reference sheet available and upload it as the first image tagged with the oc:name, as it is an alternative option to specify clearly who the character owner is - this information will be in the ref sheet image description.
    
   Also a good reason for using oc:name format is that everyone can do this and the tag will be in a different color, whereas the blue character tags must be set by staff and thus needs to be reported in a forum thread. This seems like a lot of work because there are tens of thousands (if not more) of furry original characters.
    
   I still think users should be able to change color of tags on their own like on e621 but as this not the case this is the only option to enable ordinary users to make the tag colorful (well, this and artist: and comic:).

• Non-furry images in furry settings/series, like a page of comic about Bowser and Peach with only Peach  
• Non-furry anthropomorphic content, such as The Brave Little Toaster, Wall-E, or the Xenomorph  
• Furry adjacent/derived content, such as humanizations of furry characters or Equestria Girls  
• The odd case of a furry-centric artist not having a better place to showcase a non-furry image
   
   
  The tag will be monitored and added to several default filters, and I don’t envision that it’ll get much use outside of the above cases; uploading generic animu girls or cityscapes won’t be allowed. If for some reason it gets wildly out of hand or we accidentally tapped into a hidden VeggieTales fandom with tens of thousands of fanart pieces being uploaded then we’ll revisit that policy.
   
  (or rename to veggiebooru)

Outlines of genitals visible through clothing (cameltoes, bulges, anus ‘cameltoes’)

Sheaths and balls, as long as they are…

• Not detailed (e.g. covered in fur)
• An anatomical detail that just happens to be visible on an otherwise safe themed picture

Visible detailed sheaths or balls

Note that this is from a kids cartoon (Cleopatra in Space), and that’s an anus (that is shown actively farting) at the end of the tail:  

 
I see this returned:

Characters in “saucy” poses with sexual implications (e.g. laying down on bed with bedroom eyes and lingerie)

Highly-subjective implications (are these “I miss you, my love” eyes, or “let’s fuck now” eyes? Is there even a difference?) are generally a problem in ratings. I recommend removing the reference to bedroom eyes, and focusing on the sexual nature of the outfit, so people don’t get the wrong impression and start going after stuff just like in kids cartoons where a modestly-clothed or featurelessly-naked animal characters pose and give a look from a bed. Note the following from screencaps on Derpi:  

detailed: when a character has two penises that have separate bases use diphallism

Complete nudity without visible sexual arousal

It seems very strange to me that there’s a catchall like this for top+bottom without caring about features in Questionable, when top or bottom with non-detailed features is only Suggestive. Basically, on Derpi, Austin Powers joke nudity (random objects in the way of seeing the “naughty bits”) is only Suggestive because when you block the features, it really takes away almost all of the problem, and even some kids stuff can get away with that. This is TV-PG by the way:  

 

Naked (and semi-naked) characters presented in sexy poses

The “naked” part seems redundant with the above bit, but assuming the above bit was removed, the problem then is really that it feels to me like nude features are worse than a lack of them combined with a sexy pose.  
As for “semi-naked”, I’m not sure whether it means Suggestive’s partial nudity or just something scantily clad. If scantily clad, then it’s basically the same issue as with naked. If instead it means partial nudity, then the problem is that again because it doesn’t care about features, this would mean a character wiggling their butt at the camera with no features visible would be Questionable all the way in Questionable, next to detailed genitals.  
Consider how it applies to this: