RedCollarBlackCollar said:
https://hypnohub.net/post?tags=knight
Knight tag appears as character tag. Should we make it a regular tag, or remove it completely?
Removal won't be any use, since someone would add it again.
n0t_that_one_guy said:
I have a tag I'd like to suggest - "accidental dom," or "involuntary dom." Basically, where the dom ends up with one or more hypnotized subs, but didn't actually do anything to make it happen, or when a sub goes out of their way to hypnotize new subs without the dom's orders. A few examples:

https://hypnohub.net/post/show/77136/absurdres-ahegao-andra_-zko-blonde_hair-bra-brain_
https://hypnohub.net/post/show/75144/aware-black_hair-breasts-collar-consensual-female_
https://hypnohub.net/post/show/76837/breasts-consensual-dark_skin-female_only-femsub-fi
https://hypnohub.net/post/show/38489/aware-caption_only-carly_carmine-consensual-female
https://hypnohub.net/post/show/38490/blue_hair-boots-bracelet-caption_only-clothed-fema (for the last few lines)
https://hypnohub.net/post/show/26152/accidental_hypnosis-anonymind_-manipper-big_hero_6
https://hypnohub.net/post/show/47157/accidental_hypnosis-blonde_hair-blue_eyes-blush-br
https://hypnohub.net/post/show/42251/black_hair-blush-brown_hair-coin-empty_eyes-female

I know there's others, but I can't seem to find them at the moment.

The thing is, some of these fit the "accidental hypnosis" or "self hypnosis" or even "hypnotized hypnotist" tags, but searching for just one of those won't find all of them. I think there needs to be a tag that will do that.
If one sees it happen in the pic then it could be added but looking at your examples all of them only happen in text so the new tag you are suggestion should not be put on them.
MaDrow said:
Removal won't be any use, since someone would add it again.
As far as I know, there is a way to alter it. I wanted to check beforehand if there was a reason for why it's a character tag in the first place.

Argonis said:
If one sees it happen in the pic then it could be added but looking at your examples all of them only happen in text so the new tag you are suggestion should not be put on them.
Pretty much this. It's better to have more visual examples than ones relying solely on text.
Argonis said:
If one sees it happen in the pic then it could be added but looking at your examples all of them only happen in text so the new tag you are suggestion should not be put on them.
It's kind of a text-only thing. I mean, try to find an instance of accidental hypnosis that isn't either self-hypnosis or text-only - it's that kinda thing. Also, I didn't know that text-only tagging was a bad thing?
n0t_that_one_guy said:
It's kind of a text-only thing. I mean, try to find an instance of accidental hypnosis that isn't either self-hypnosis or text-only - it's that kinda thing. Also, I didn't know that text-only tagging was a bad thing?
It's not a bad thing necessarily. The issue is that the tagging system relies more heavily on what you see in an image. So it goes against tagging guidelines to have the vast majority of posts be tagged based on an element that's non-visual.
RedCollarBlackCollar said:
It's not a bad thing necessarily. The issue is that the tagging system relies more heavily on what you see in an image. So it goes against tagging guidelines to have the vast majority of posts be tagged based on an element that's non-visual.
I can understand that if it would clog up the search for people who want visual stuff, but if a tag's describing a largely text-only concept, who's being harmed by the ability to search for it? I don't see how anyone's better off with this tag not existing. Surely the ability to search for it at all and having to wade through text-only stuff if you're a purely visual person is better than not being able to search for it at all, even for the visually-oriented?
Hawkeye said:
I can understand that if it would clog up the search for people who want visual stuff, but if a tag's describing a largely text-only concept, who's being harmed by the ability to search for it? I don't see how anyone's better off with this tag not existing. Surely the ability to search for it at all and having to wade through text-only stuff if you're a purely visual person is better than not being able to search for it at all, even for the visually-oriented?
Nobody ever said that there's harm involved. It's mainly an issue of setting up precedent that goes against guidelines. If this one text-based tag is approved, then so should every other text-based tag.

Honestly in this specific instance, I feel like this could be a legitimate tag. Cause it can be clearly seen as visual, and I believe that I've seen an artist or two draw such images in the past. So it has the potential, it could just use some better examples backing it.
Bathing and bath seem like the same thing. Should there be a joint tag for them both?
RedCollarBlackCollar said:
Bathing and bath seem like the same thing. Should there be a joint tag for them both?
bath can stay as most likely that would be what would be typed for searching.
I feel that we really need to add a caption tag for captions. Having it redirect to the "text" tag just doesn't work. The "text" tag is there for any amount of text, even as low as one word or even a grunt or text written on the character themselves.. I think the caption tag should include the text tag automatically but not the other way around.

Right now there's no way to actually search for captions themselves, and there's a lot of people, myself included, that love captions specifically. I feel there's a large enough amount to warrant the separate tagging. I love em enough to make this post and volunteer to start going through and tagging them if the ok is given from on high, and if it's separated from the text tag.

I know a while back there was arguments about "text blocks" and I don't know how that was solved, but haven't seen them flagged in a while myself. But this would also fix the problem people had with those. With this you could just blacklist the caption tag and be fine.

I see no downsides to adding the caption tag, (aside from needing to go back and tag old captions.) But that doesn't need to be done immediately and I'm down to start doing it. It just makes it easier to search for a fair portion of posts on the site and that's the most important part of tags right?
there is a caption only tag.
Argonis said:
there is a caption only tag.
Yes, for when the picture isn't hypnosis related without the caption. Caption_only should probably be merged into a general caption tag for images/manips with hypnosis in the picture. There's a ton of captions I've seen that don't have that tag for whatever reasons.

I think an overarching caption tag would make much more sense.
Timo4545 said:
Yes, for when the picture isn't hypnosis related without the caption. Caption_only should probably be merged into a general caption tag for images/manips with hypnosis in the picture. There's a ton of captions I've seen that don't have that tag for whatever reasons.

I think an overarching caption tag would make much more sense.
I suppose that could work, though that feels like something the mods would need to discuss between ourselves before potentially implementing, given how many images would be retagged by it.
I submit a "Jungle Girl" tag for approval. Something like this: https://hypnohub.net/post/show/78326/barefoot-bikini-black_hair-breasts-coils-drool-eve

Anyone who fits the motif of the actual character Jungle Girl: https://hypnohub.net/post/show/25334/barefoot-bikini-breasts-coils-comic-dark_skin-disn

Anything that invokes the leopard-print bikini https://hypnohub.net/post/show/74165/barefoot-blonde_hair-blush-breasts-coils-dazed-dis

Or women in the jungle with this kinda Mowgli-style bra/panties: https://hypnohub.net/post/show/40079/animated_gif-bikini-black_hair-chloe_-iamaneagle-d

Thoughts?
Why do we have topless and bottomless apply to every instance of exposed tops and bottoms, including full-out nudity, rather than the conventional usage where you're covering the top or the bottom but not both? Do we even have tags to let people search for those specific instances?
About if a pic qualifies for large_breasts or huge_breasts, is the head hair included in the "head"?

I'm asking this because of post #79220
MaDrow said:
About if a pic qualifies for large_breasts or huge_breasts, is the head hair included in the "head"?

I'm asking this because of post #79220
I'd personally say ignore the hair, because it isn't actually the head, and some people have super poofy hair that makes their head look 2x as big as it actually is.
what does her hair have to do with her breasts?
Argonis said:
what does her hair have to do with her breasts?
The head:breast size ratio for determining if the tag should be large_breasts or huge_breasts.
https://hypnohub.net/post?tags=blowjob_face
Why is this a tag? Is felattio not already enough to suffice?

Otherwise, gonna remove the tag.
RedCollarBlackCollar said:
https://hypnohub.net/post?tags=blowjob_face
Why is this a tag? Is felattio not already enough to suffice?

Otherwise, gonna remove the tag.
well, in cases where they're miming sucking on a dick or a sucking on a phallic object (like a hotdog) suggestively, it kinda works
RedCollarBlackCollar said:
https://hypnohub.net/post?tags=blowjob_face
Why is this a tag? Is felattio not already enough to suffice?

Otherwise, gonna remove the tag.
I'm pretty sure that's referring to a specific face women make that's half meme half fetish at this point. Felattio doesn't always include that face.
Hawkeye said:
I'm pretty sure that's referring to a specific face women make that's half meme half fetish at this point. Felattio doesn't always include that face.
isn't that octopus face?
godzillahomer said:
well, in cases where they're miming sucking on a dick or a sucking on a phallic object (like a hotdog) suggestively, it kinda works
Hawkeye said:
I'm pretty sure that's referring to a specific face women make that's half meme half fetish at this point. Felattio doesn't always include that face.
Still feels bit redundant. I’ll ask Dreamshade and other staff about it. Just wanted to get other users’ input before bringing it up with them.

Meanwhile, this tag also feels bit weird to me:
https://hypnohub.net/post?tags=instant_loss

I get what it’s going for, though I worry it might be applied to way too many posts that don’t qualify.
Is it possible to add a tag for men like in these pictures: https://hypnohub.net/post/show/56156/ghost-pantyhose-possession-text-urination https://hypnohub.net/post/show/80910/black_hair-brown_eyes-brown_hair-kissing-original

It's a pretty common trope and I'd honestly like to blacklist it.
Hideki_Inoue said:
Is it possible to add a tag for men like in these pictures: https://hypnohub.net/post/show/56156/ghost-pantyhose-possession-text-urination https://hypnohub.net/post/show/80910/black_hair-brown_eyes-brown_hair-kissing-original

It's a pretty common trope and I'd honestly like to blacklist it.
Everyone else calls it fat/ugly bastard. So let's go with that
skullman2033 said:
Everyone else calls it fat/ugly bastard. So let's go with that
Having a fat_man and/or ugly_man tag would be nice. There needs to be some way to filter them out.
Can we get a toon dark magician girl charecter tag please? They are two different charercters so i feel they should have their own tags
foffyoul5 said:
Can we get a toon dark magician girl charecter tag please? They are two different charercters so i feel they should have their own tags
I feel like dark magician girl should already suffice. Unless there are some more posts of her, feels unnecessary to add at the moment.
RedCollarBlackCollar said:
I feel like dark magician girl should already suffice. Unless there are some more posts of her, feels unnecessary to add at the moment.
Theres 2 already that im aware of 1 that i didnt add yet due to no tag of her
Wait theres 3 already possible 4 so that would mean id have a 5th