• The regular administrative staff are taking a vacation, and in the meantime, Biigoh is taking over. See here for more information.
  • A notice about Rule 3 regarding sites hosting pirated/unauthorized content has been made. Please see here for details.
  • Staff is working to deal with the problem of synonymous tags. See here for more information and to suggest tag mergers.
  • Due to issues with external spam filters, QQ is currently unable to send any mail to Microsoft E-mail addresses. This includes any account at live.com, hotmail.com or msn.com. Signing up to the forum with one of these addresses will result in your verification E-mail never arriving. For best results, please use a different E-mail provider for your QQ address.
  • For prospective new members, a word of warning: don't use common names like Dennis, Simon, or Kenny if you decide to create an account. Spammers have used them all before you and gotten those names flagged in the anti-spam databases. Your account registration will be rejected because of it.
  • Since it has happened MULTIPLE times now, I want to be very clear about this. You do not get to abandon an account and create a new one. You do not get to pass an account to someone else and create a new one. If you do so anyway, you will be banned for creating sockpuppets.
  • Due to the actions of particularly persistent spammers and trolls, we will be banning disposable email addresses from today onward.

(Partially) fixing the tag system

Reader mode
luda305 said:
Need also to differentiate between Harry Potter (character) from Harry Potter (series).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
this is not possible, at least not as a moderator/staff action. There isn't a "Harry Potter (character)" tag so all the existing tags need to be assumed to refer to "Harry Potter (series)". You can try and advocate for authors to use character tags, but this is not the thread for creating new tags.
There are a large number of tags in the form (character/series) + si. E.g., hp si, naruto si. I think those tags should be replaced with two separate tags, e.g., a Naruto tag and an si tag
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I disagree. Having them as a combined tag makes searching a bit easier, and wouldn't have any real benefit, especially as I'd expect the tags you're objecting to to would be recreated almost immediately.

If you can pull the entire tag list, you ought to just run spell check on the darn thing.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
There's a link to the JSON file of all 24k+ tags, feel free to try running spell check on that, please let me know how far you get before all the legitimate variations the spellcheck tags make you give up https://forum.questionablequesting....ng-the-tag-system.38716/page-11#post-12884135
 
A long list of incest and adjacent terms are all over. I saw at least 8+ tags with 'incest' as a part of them. Grouping them would be great. I also saw quite a few tags that all have the same words, just different ammounts of periods, elipses, or commas.
 
KaneLives said:
A long list of incest and adjacent terms are all over. I saw at least 8+ tags with 'incest' as a part of them. Grouping them would be great. I also saw quite a few tags that all have the same words, just different ammounts of periods, elipses, or commas.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think the difference comes from parent/child vs. sibling incest. Also, I'd rather have it differentiated between lesbian and regular incest.
And you'd have misc incest I suppose.
 
NumberSix said:
I think the difference comes from parent/child vs. sibling incest. Also, I'd rather have it differentiated between lesbian and regular incest.
And you'd have misc incest I suppose.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I get that some are for different types, but when you have incest, incest is wincest, incest is wincest........??, and the like. That's not types, that's just poor tag use. Then you have incest maybe, incest possible, incest eventually.......maybe. Again, not types. Just lack of proper tag usage.
 
Will this thread stick around for future use if others wish to take up the noble and mighty job of tag wrangling?
 
KaneLives said:
Will this thread stick around for future use if others wish to take up the noble and mighty job of tag wrangling?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
In the hypothetical scenario that I've disappeared or moved on, the thread would still be here, yeah. Whether anyone else would have the time and inclination to take over, idk, but, if not, staff might recruit for this role specifically.
 
KaneLives said:
I get that some are for different types, but when you have incest, incest is wincest, incest is wincest........??, and the like. That's not types, that's just poor tag use. Then you have incest maybe, incest possible, incest eventually.......maybe. Again, not types. Just lack of proper tag usage.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Pretty sure the ones that say possible are generally for quests, for establishing if such a thing would be allowed to happen by the author if the votes go that way but won't if they don't.
LurkingInTheDeceit said:
In the hypothetical scenario that I've disappeared or moved on, the thread would still be here, yeah. Whether anyone else would have the time and inclination to take over, idk, but, if not, staff might recruit for this role specifically.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean nobody else on the staff side seemed to think it was necessary, so I don't think they'd go out of their way to get a replacement if you stopped unless the sentiment massively changed behind the scenes suddenly.
 
AztecCroc said:
I mean nobody else on the staff side seemed to think it was necessary, so I don't think they'd go out of their way to get a replacement if you stopped unless the sentiment massively changed behind the scenes suddenly.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I mean, it's less that other staff didn't think it was necessary (or at least cautiously beneficial), and more that it's a lot of work. Like, a lot a lot of work. I've basically stopped looking at normal reports since I started.

What to do with tags has been discussed, somewhat lengthily relative to other issues, and recruitment was raised from the outset as the solution for filling the labour gap. Even recruitment is a fair amount of work though; the exact process was still only an untested draft, it relies heavily on busy admins to initiate, and whether anyone interested enough in fixing the tag system to put in so many hours could also be trusted to be conservative enough to not break the tag system is another thing.

Now I've figured out the pipeline, and started the process, I'd expect it's more likely something would be done to keep it going, were I to stop. You're right there's no guarantees though.
 
Do'emmu said:
Why even bother?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Unfortunately, I don't have the answer to such a deep question.
Asmodeus said:
You could ask is there some fascinating reason why excluding "lesbian" does not exclude "useless lesbian" nor "useful lesbian" or any other variation of lesbians?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Because they're different tags, and not yet Synonyms. I'll be making them Synonyms during this batch though, so excluding one will exclude all after I've done so.
 
Because "lesbian" is about who's in the pairing and "useless lesbian" is a particular trope about such a pairing. They're not synonymous-- though it'd be fine to have one imply the other, which would solve "useless lesbian" not being excluded.
 
I moved the tags like 'pure smut' and 'just sex scenes' to the Synonyms of 'smut' rather than the merge groups, because they do convey useful information on second thought.

Was idly thinking about making them their own group, actually, so the tiers would be something like 'porn without plot', 'plot and porn', 'plot before porn', and 'SFW', with the 'porn' group not specifying proportions. Think I might do that.
Kitty S. Lillian said:
Because "lesbian" is about who's in the pairing and "useless lesbian" is a particular trope about such a pairing. They're not synonymous-- though it'd be fine to have one imply the other, which would solve "useless lesbian" not being excluded.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm not sure what you mean by 'imply the other', but as someone unfamiliar with the trope- is it likely someone would specifically want (or not want) 'useless lesbians' when searching, rather than the broader 'lesbian' tag? If so, I can make all the 'useless lesbian' variants link together, but keep it separate from the broader 'lesbian' tag.
 
Last edited:
LurkingInTheDeceit said:
Mostly hesitant regarding the 'original erotica' tag, wondering whether to keep that separate.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Wouldn't original erotica be more along the lines of original story or non-fanfiction or original work than just being erotica?
Because while it is saying that it's erotica, it's also saying that it's an original work.
 
lurkingkraken said:
Wouldn't original erotica be more along the lines of original story or non-fanfiction or original work than just being erotica?
Because while it is saying that it's erotica, it's also saying that it's an original work.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
That's kinda what I was thinking, so will keep that as a stray. Also reminded me to actually add the erotica stuff to the list.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 3 more.
    • Total: 26 (members: 6, guests: 20)
    Back
    Top