otoko no ko -> trap

Confetto said:

There's no logic in trying to argue that a vote against a specific term somehow converts into a vote in favor of that term.

No one said anything like that.

blindVigil said:

No one said anything like that.

Sorry, I think I just misinterpreted the above posts. I edited my post now, thanks for catching that.

Honestly, I don't think whether other anime sites use the term proposed in the first BUR really matters in the end, because I'm certain we have a sizable audience who come here specifically because we don't use it. Not to mention, it's very clearly falling out of use in the wider internet, no doubt in part due to its transphobic connotations, and also most people can only name "Danbooru" out of these anime sites in the first place, which means we're the most mainstream of the bunch. I strongly believe the stats for the wider internet matter more than the circles for these smaller sites who are no doubt the minority among their peers.

I really don't like the attempt to logic the way around the fact that the majority of people consider this BUR a bad idea. Especially when the proposed term in the first BUR stands a not small chance of causing harm to real people.

nonamethanks said:

It's similarly bad form to consider a downvote for trap matched by an upvote for femboy (or vice versa) as a vote against the rename. We're not robots, we can draw conclusions without having to follow bad logic. The data's all there and you can analyze it at any depth you want.
It's fairly obvious that most people want the tag name to change, and only a very small minority prefers the status quo. The large amount of downvotes is only due to people picking one option and downvoting the other. If we had only offered one option (no matter whether femboy or trap), the tally would be positive. Picking the option everyone hates (and an option that was not voted on in the first place when it was changed) because people are split (and not even evenly!) between two other choices makes no sense. At best it's disingenuous, at worst it's dishonest.

The only data there is that between Trap and OnK, people voted to keep OnK and between OnK and Femboy, people voted to keep OnK. The only thing you can try and draw from that besides those two direct conclusions is a possible ranked voting of preference which would put OnK higher than both Femboy and Trap. But again that would be a stretch on estimating how people voted without giving them a ranked vote to actually give the real values, but it's a lot more of a grounded interpretation of the data than what you're drawing which puts trap in the lead.

nonamethanks said:

Furthermore, the list of sites that actually use these terms not only must be considered now, but should've also been considered when it was decided whether to rename this tag in the first place, as it would've been immediately obvious how stupid the whole thing was. That the tag was changed despite everyone else using other terms (and to the wrong spelling too!) is nothing short of blind and pathetic, and it should be laughed upon just like we now laugh at old decisions like ito_noizi -> itou noiji or bento -> obentou, especially given that it amounted to no change in the rest of the booru ecosystem, as everyone else rightfully rejected this change and kept the term that people actually use.

We are the only english site that uses "otoko no ko" (that's not straight-up lifting and rehosting our content). For any other tag that's the only reason we'd need to rename this. The only reason there's even a vote is that the tag is so large and so old, and so that people can decide what to actually rename it to this time rather than to keep this poor excuse of a name.

You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. As you say, you don't need the vote count to go ahead with the alias to trap, but you're also trying to win the vote count through creative statistics. Don't make this such a farce, overriding the majority vote is one thing, but trying to make it as if you're doing it because the majority of people also voted for it when they didn't is just insulting. I'm probably just as surprised as you that trap didn't have a majority +1 votes between OnK and trap.

I mean if I really wanted to push a "trap" narrative I could pull up tons of malware-ridded illegal manga scan sites that use it or calculate just how many voters on each BUR actually upload or engage with the genre on here at all. But the point should be to replace onk with a term people actually say and would find in a search. If that term is femboy or something else that's fine, seeing what other sites use can aid in that and gauge the landscape.

I also don't think any of the sites listed by NNT are small at all, I use three of them regularly! It's also not purposely lopsided and includes Exhentai which uses neither. I wish I could find a site that primarly uses femboy, but I think the fact that when looking I can't means it's more informally used.

Edit: Actually forum #349612 is the "Status Quo BUR" and should probably be calculated with the rest.

zetsubousensei said:

Edit: Actually forum #349612 is the "Status Quo BUR" and should probably be calculated with the reat.

I think that one is more about fixing the name, sort of like how you fix a wrong romanisation. At least, if that's how I understand it, that's the only BUR out of all of them in this topic that I voted on specifically for that reason and not because I like the status quo (in truth, I don't really care if it gets renamed or not).

if there are status quos Danbooru isn't following the spacing of that tag is definitely one of them yes

GreyOmega said:

The only data there is that between Trap and OnK, people voted to keep OnK and between OnK and Femboy, people voted to keep OnK.

...

As you say, you don't need the vote count to go ahead with the alias to trap, but you're also trying to win the vote count through creative statistics.

When somebody is presented with two BURs about the same tag, and they upvote BUR A but downvote BUR B, then it means both of their votes are intended to be in support of BUR A. As such, when some users vote in this way for BUR A, some do it for BUR B, and some downvote both BURs for the status quo, the natural result is that both BURs have a larger amount of downvotes than upvotes. This is extremely simple and basic logic; there is nothing "creative" about it. Viewing all of these downvotes in isolation despite both BURs being right next to each other is nothing short of purposeful obstructionism.

WRS said:

I think that one is more about fixing the name, sort of like how you fix a wrong romanisation. At least, if that's how I understand it, that's the only BUR out of all of them in this topic that I voted on specifically for that reason and not because I like the status quo (in truth, I don't really care if it gets renamed or not).

Accounting for the rename BUR barely shifts the needle because a lot of people who voted for that either already downvoted the other two BURs or voted positively on one of the other BURs.

I adjusted NNT's vote analysis script a bit (sorry, the indents for the loops don't show up when I copy the text):

The original analysis had a couple flaws. One major flaw is that a positive vote for a tag name is assumed to be in support of it regardless of how they voted on the other BUR. However, some voted positive on both, so we can't say they support one over the other. I put them in a new "any change" group and deducted those votes from the trap and femboy totals. However, this alone doesn't change things that much.

Another flaw is that it only considers those in full support of either BUR (the previously mentioned double-positive flaw notwithstanding). I think we should also consider those that voted differently for each BUR, including those that voted on one and not the other. If we consider those that lean toward one position, the results look very different.

The current results from this new analysis are as follow:

While an overwhelming majority of voters upvoted trap, the majority for votes leaning toward trap versus leaning toward femboy are much slimmer.

The original analysis had a couple flaws. One major flaw is that a positive vote for a tag name is assumed to be in support of it regardless of how they voted on the other BUR. However, some voted positive on both, so we can't say they support one over the other. I put them in a new "any change" group and deducted those votes from the trap and femboy totals. However, this alone doesn't change things that much.

It's not a major flaw, it's on purpose. Those votes are counted for both, which means the tally does not actually change. If 30 people vote for A and 25 people vote for B, but 5 of these people have voted for both, then the adjusted result would be 25 vs 20, which has the same amount of vote difference. There's no error there. But if you remove those both-voters from the tally, and 20 people have voted for C, then you're actually strengthening C's argument, because it becomes (25 + 20) = 45 vs 20 instead of (30 + 25) = 55 vs 20.

A valid point would be that you'd have to count them half in each camp in order to have a better total tally, but I didn't post a total tally, just votes for each camp.

Another flaw is that it only considers those in full support of either BUR (the previously mentioned double-positive flaw notwithstanding). I think we should also consider those that voted differently for each BUR, including those that voted on one and not the other. If we consider those that lean toward one position, the results look very different.

I didn't give meh voters much weight unless they voted for both because there's no way to tell whether they actually care about the status quo or not. Someone who votes meh on trap and doesn't vote on femboy could be under the "don't care" camp too, it doesn't make much sense to count them as leaning towards trap. There's no way to tell what the absence of a vote means, they simply could have not seen the other BUR, and the first BUR of a topic always gets more votes.

nonamethanks said:

I didn't give meh voters much weight unless they voted for both because there's no way to tell whether they actually care about the status quo or not. Someone who votes meh on trap and doesn't vote on femboy could be under the "don't care" camp too, it doesn't make much sense to count them as leaning towards trap.

I initially included those votes in previous drafts, but I realized the same thing and removed them. The only voters that voted for a single BUR I'm currently counting are those that voted positive.

Relevant lines:
trap_only = len(femboy_none & trap_pos)
femboy_only = len(trap_none & femboy_pos)

I probably should've renamed the variables as trap_pos_only and femboy_pos_only to make it more clear.

Right, but you're also doing things like counting people who voted meh for trap and negative for femboy as pro-trap. They're not pro-trap, they're "don't care about trap vs otoko no ko, but against femboy".

And yeah, I didn't post super detailed stats because the vote tally is fairly conclusive and pro-rename no matter how you try to analyze the data. There's no way to spin this in a way that would show support for the status quo.

nonamethanks said:

Right, but you're also doing things like counting people who voted meh for trap and negative for femboy as pro-trap. They're not pro-trap, they're "don't care about trap vs otoko no ko, but against femboy".

And yeah, I didn't post super detailed stats because the vote tally is fairly conclusive and pro-rename no matter how you try to analyze the data. There's no way to spin this in a way that would show support for the status quo.

Okay, that makes sense.

GreyOmega said:

The only data there is that between Trap and OnK, people voted to keep OnK and between OnK and Femboy, people voted to keep OnK. The only thing you can try and draw from that besides those two direct conclusions is a possible ranked voting of preference which would put OnK higher than both Femboy and Trap. But again that would be a stretch on estimating how people voted without giving them a ranked vote to actually give the real values, but it's a lot more of a grounded interpretation of the data than what you're drawing which puts trap in the lead.

You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. As you say, you don't need the vote count to go ahead with the alias to trap, but you're also trying to win the vote count through creative statistics. Don't make this such a farce, overriding the majority vote is one thing, but trying to make it as if you're doing it because the majority of people also voted for it when they didn't is just insulting. I'm probably just as surprised as you that trap didn't have a majority +1 votes between OnK and trap.

Belated reply because I didn't see this, but if this was a farce we wouldn't be having the vote at all, we'd just force it through - just like how it was done the first time this tag was renamed. Notice how femboy is also an option?
I downvoted femboy because I prefer trap and I think femboy is too close to real life, but I'd take femboy any day over otoko no ko if that was the only choice. The votes do not surprise me at all because, as was already explained, people are voting for one tag and against the other. That you'd claim that someone upvoting trap but downvoting femboy and someone upvoting femboy but downvoting trap should both be considered in favor of the status quo is the real farce here.

nonamethanks said:
It's fairly obvious that most people want the tag name to change, and only a very small minority prefers the status quo. The large amount of downvotes is only due to people picking one option and downvoting the other. If we had only offered one option (no matter whether femboy or trap), the tally would be positive.

that isn't obvious man what are you talking about. there's like twenty more anti votes for trap than pro votes. objectively speaking people, the ones on this site who can be assed to log in and vote, do not want the term to change to trap. they don't seem to want it to change to femboy either. it seems like the obvious takeaway is the opposite of the thing you're saying

taki-tak said:

that isn't obvious man what are you talking about. there's like twenty more anti votes for trap than pro votes. objectively speaking people, the ones on this site who can be assed to log in and vote, do not want the term to change to trap. they don't seem to want it to change to femboy either. it seems like the obvious takeaway is the opposite of the thing you're saying

Maybe actually look at who's voting on what instead of just looking at numbers. Most users that upvoted one downvoted the other. That obviously can't be interpreted as "no one wants the name to change" because those people clearly want one of the BURs to be approved and not the other one. I upvoted trap and downvoted femboy, because I want the name to change and don't want femboy to be what it changes to because its generally understood meaning is broader than what the tag is for.

The only votes that can be interpreted as preferring the status quo are the ones that downvoted both BURs, which was only 17 people as of the last tally. There's far more than 17 people voting on these BURs.

looking at numbers is the point of voting idk what to tell you. i absolutely understand your logic is "people don't want it to change to trap, and people don't want it to change to femboy, which means people want it to change" and im telling you that's dumb logic. the one that's positive is the one that is keeping otokonoko. maybe your ranked choice voting would have merit but you can't really make the claim that you're making off of the data; people keep framing at as a comparison between two options when there is very clearly three and one is ahead.

i think people are psychoanalyzing the arrows and neutral faces of disconnected BURs as anything but sentiment on the individual proposed changes a bit too much

taki-tak said:

looking at numbers is the point of voting idk what to tell you. i absolutely understand your logic is "people don't want it to change to trap, and people don't want it to change to femboy, which means people want it to change" and im telling you that's dumb logic. the one that's positive is the one that is keeping otokonoko. maybe your ranked choice voting would have merit but you can't really make the claim that you're making off of the data; people keep framing at as a comparison between two options when there is very clearly three and one is ahead.

Are you being intentionally obtuse? Absolutely no one is using the logic you're describing. You're the only person using that logic. We're not looking at 240 different people (roughly the total number of votes between both BURs). The majority of voters voted on both. Someone who upvoted one BUR and downvoted the other BUR does not want the status quo. They want the BUR they upvoted, obviously. You can't count those people in favor of otoko no ko, because they clearly preferred one of the alternatives. That's why they upvoted it.