pool #5929 - Sitting with Viewer "Character that are sitting with the viewer at a table."
Objectively taggable and identical to the existing pov_across_table tag.
I don't support the pov_across_table tag because it sounds like an arbitrary conjunction of words, and it sounds somewhat forced. I don't know if we want to have another tag that everyone must look up in order to understand.
Also, our guidelines (wiki #11292) say that general tags are used for "describing the image in simple keywords". That is not a simple keyword, but is rather a sequence of words that makes no sense linguistically and that has been mathematically mapped to the theme by a person. I'm not sure if this tag fits those guidelines.
Personally I'd find sitting with viewer to be unintuitive if the tag was only for images of people sitting across a table from you. Intuitively, I'd think the naming would first suggest it is for images like post #386314 with the character sitting next to the viewer on the same seat/couch.
Additionally, I think pov_across_table is kind of focusing on the wrong aspect of these images (if that is the tag we're going to use). The focus should be more that from the pov they're sitting at a table/desk and not whether they're sitting across from anyone at the desk or table, so something like pov_sitting_at_table, pov_at_table, etc. The "at_table" might be better, given that the pov doesn't necessarily have to be sitting, but could be standing before one.
+1 for deletion of pool #6793 (Aya+Momiji+Hatate) pool #5110 (Chen+Rin+Shou). We don't do coupling/pairing pools. These are exactly the same thing except for 3 instead of 2 characters.
I didn't know we have pov_across_table tag, but it sounds more intuitive and natural to me than NWF_Renim's suggestion of 'pov_at_table'. So consider one vote from me for 'across'.
Sal.N said: I didn't know we have pov_across_table tag, but it sounds more intuitive and natural to me than NWF_Renim's suggestion of 'pov_at_table'. So consider one vote from me for 'across'.
My point is that it is focusing at the wrong aspect of what should be tagged, being "intuitive" and "natural" don't change the fact the tag is focusing at the wrong thing that should be tagged. What should be tagged is where the point of view is, which is that it is at a table, not that the point of view is sitting across from someone, which to me seems unnecessarily specific. Having it as specifically as across table doesn't allow for images where there isn't someone facing you from across a table (could be you're sitting in a classroom and everyone is looking at the board) and the wording of the name would imply that people have to be opposite of the viewer, as opposed to sitting to the side (such as sitting at the head of a table and looking down the table).
My point is that it is focusing at the wrong aspect of what should be tagged, being "intuitive" and "natural" don't change the fact the tag is focusing at the wrong thing that should be tagged. What should be tagged is where the point of view is, which is that it is at a table, not that the point of view is sitting across from someone, which to me seems unnecessarily specific.
I have to object this argument. The aspect that should be tagged is "someone who is sitting together with the viewer at the table", not the location. pov_at_table is too general, if I (the viewer) am floating and look down at the table, it's also pov_at_table. It doesn't describe anything useful.
pov_across_table, on the other hand, brings to mind 2 things: 1) being at the table, 2) more importantly, it streeses on the person sitting on the other side, who we're supposed to focus on.
I'm sure we can continually object to each other's arguments for eternity then, since I still stress that the tag is too narrow and fails to tag other images that should be included under such a tag.
The across tag is essentially a combination what should be be two independent concepts (and thus independent tags), one being that someone is across from the viewer and the other is that the point of view is located before a table. A more broader tag should come before a more specific tag. When the broader tag requires division, then the more specific compound tag should come around.
These are long-winded and don't look good, I feel. Although the latter is definitely the most precise atm.
Let's first redefine the concept we want to tag.
- Do we want to tag all pics that have the character sitting together with the viewer? - Or do we want to tag all pics that have the character being at the table with the viewer, regardless whether they're sitting or standing? - Must there be a table (either implied or clearly drawn) in the setting? How about a pov where you two are sitting on a couch looking at each other?
pool #613 - Figure models Isn't there something else for stuff like this?
pool #586 - Baka-Rangers Another taggable group. The tag bakaranger already exists, but it only has 3 posts and probably should be changed to baka_rangers
souryuu9 said: pool #390 - Otaku Contemporary Banned artist.
Would this still fall under the "we don't delete pools just because all the images in it are deleted" category? Not that deleting a pool is that detrimental now, since it can still be undeleted.
pool #1617 Pool: Touhou - Everybody Is Straight in Gensoukyou
I believe this pool should be deleted. The concept of the pool is about women showing attraction to men in a specific series. Such a general concept doesn't need a pool. It's only defense would be that it concerns a fan made meme, but the pool itself isn't even about the meme in question. This pool's concept has no basis beyond being a counter to a fan-meme.
Pools encompassing series specific fan-memes are already rather questionable and subject to deletion. So why is there a pool meant solely as a "counter" to one of these fan-memes?
There's no pools for "Madoka - Virtuous Homura" or "Touhou - Generous Reimu" and I can't imagine they'd be allowed or either.
The recently created hetero tag does make that pool redundant...
Explosion said:
Pools encompassing series specific fan-memes are already rather questionable and subject to deletion. So why is there a pool meant solely as a "counter" to one of these fan-memes?
There's no pools for "Madoka - Virtuous Homura" or "Touhou - Generous Reimu" and I can't imagine they'd be allowed or either.
There are pools for "Feminine Yuugi" (pool #1643) and "Flexible Yoshika" (pool #3882) that do nothing but "counter" a perfectly taggable meme, but don't ask me why they haven't been deleted yet.
There are pools for "Feminine Yuugi" (pool #1643) and "Flexible Yoshika" (pool #3882) that do nothing but "counter" a perfectly taggable meme
I agree there are quite a few pools that can be turned into tags, but i wouldn't know how to tag those 2 though, mainly the Yoshika one. (cannot be tagged with flexible)
I agree there are quite a few pools that can be turned into tags, but i wouldn't know how to tag those 2 though, mainly the Yoshika one. (cannot be tagged with flexible)
Returns all post in the pool, and more :D
I meant that the "memes" are taggable, and tagging/pooling those memes makes much more sense than pooling every image that does not have a meme. You can then negate those with "-" and get miyako_yoshika -zombie_pose (for the flexible variant) and hoshiguma_yuugi -pool:3160/hoshiguma_yuugi ~muscle ~abs for the feminine/not muscular variant. We don't need a pool for A and a pool for "not A" when we can write -A.
pool #3777 - My Pet Girls "A pool for sexy animal and petgirls."
pretty much on par with the "hot cowgirl", "hot doctor", "hot maid", "hot teacher", etc. pools that have been deleted. Pool is 1.8 years old and the only user (creator) of the pool stopped gardening it 1.7 years ago.
