[REJECTED] Tag implication: anal_invitation -> presenting_spread_anus

create implication anal_invitation -> presenting,spread_anus

Link to implication

Pretty self-explainatory, I suppose. Whether directly or vaguely, girls look at the viewer inviting them for sex and are opening their back door for some fun.

You can't combine implications like that, if you want to make more than one implication, use the Bulk Update Request form, available from the 'More »' site map.

This should just be a mass update. Anal_invitation is literally nothing more than a presenting spread_anus search. Tags should be useful for searches that can't be achieved by simply searching for combinations of other tags.

My thoughts exactly ^

I'd retag them all manually but currently the site's acting up with the too many requests thing. Someone can submit a BUR later -- I'll do it later if no one else does.

It's not as clear-cut.

Many posts under anal_invitation feature spread_ass rather than spread_anus.
There are some posts where anus is simply gaping, e.g. post #1117821 and post #1360270, without being spread by a character.
And then, there are posts that look like it's hand_on_ass/hand_on_own_ass or ass_grab, for example post #2402083, post #1733855, post #412289. Anus may or may not be spread/gaping in them.

So anal_invitation can't be replaced by a single tag combination.

On the other hand, making implication to any of the tags I've mentioned above is not an option either. The only possible target is presenting, but I'm not sure about it.

Ehh, to add to that, from a quick glimpse it seems most of the tags were added by OP himself, which makes me wonder if it was actually a fault on knowledge (by creating a wholly new tag instead of looking through existing ones) or just trying to force adoption of a new tag by gardeners, because I've certainly never heard of something like "anal invitation" until now. Seems wholly ambiguous in nature. Could be spread anus, could be partially visible anus, could be panties aside in addition to presenting (if we're assuming they're all present). So you're right, it's not clear-cut at all I think.

We'll see what happens. Anytime something like this happens usually it's up to a bunch of taggers to figure out the best course of action and then re-tag them all as such. Perhaps to the chagrin of the original tagger, but it is after all how the system works -- keep things tagged with intuitive phrases.

The tag implication anal_invitation -> presenting_spread_anus has been rejected.

Okay, I think I should address this, since I still see the OP using this tag.

I've tagged anal_invitation with presenting on those missing the tag, as well as either spread_anus or spread_ass (or removing one of said tags when both were applied and wasn't applicable).

The tag will be nuked, so @PowderTrail, please refrain from using it anymore. Instead, use a combination of presenting + spread_anus/spread_ass. The imminent_anal tag may also be of use to you.