[REJECTED] Tag implication: arachne -> centauroid

@MarqFJA87: ... With all due respect, you're basically...

2018-02-20T07:30:19-05:00

... With all due respect, you're basically ignoring all of the points I've made in favor of the implication without actually explaining why they're not good. And how would the implication dilute the tag when it describes a body type that is common to arachne and centaur, distinctly from any other type of spider-based or horse-based monster girl?

BTW, I disagree on the supposed need for implicating sphinx in the same manner. For one, the tag doesn't designate a type of monster girl, but rather the mythological creature known by that name, thus why this bears the tag despite being obviously non-humanoid. Two, even if we for some reason limit the tag to monster girl, it's like I've pointed out for lamia and mermaids, that there's no set design for the creature; this is centauroid, while this is most definitely not, and the latter is incidentally the conventional form of the creature in real-life myths (i.e. a centauroid "sphinx" shouldn't really be called a sphinx, it's just "sphingian", i.e. only resembles a sphinx).

@Type-kun: I think that centauroid should apply only where...

2018-02-19T05:19:27-05:00

I think that centauroid should apply only where no other, more specific tag, could describe the creature. Otherwise we'd have to implicate centaur and sphinx as well, which would serve no purpose other than diluting the tag.

@DanbooruBot: The tag implication arachne -> centauroid has...

2018-02-19T05:17:57-05:00

The tag implication arachne -> centauroid has been rejected by @Type-kun.

@MarqFJA87: > iridescent_slime said: > > I argued that if...

2017-09-29T14:02:48-04:00

iridescent_slime said:

I argued that if centauroid is interpreted to include arachne, the latter tag becomes unnecessary as it essentially becomes a centauroid spider_girl search. Since then I've come to see things differently. If we start bundling non-quadrupedal monster girls into this tag, then there's a slippery slope to using it for other variants with only two legs (post #347007) or none at all (e.g., lamia and mermaid). "Two or more pairs of legs" is just as arbitrary a distinction as "four-legged".

Not as arbitrary as you make it seem. The core of the concept remains the same, in that you acquire the creature by putting a human(oid) torso on a non-bipedal animal's body where the head/neck would normally go (or, in cases where the non-bipedal animal does not have a distinct head, like arachnids, right on the equivalent body part).

As for whether lamias and mermaids count... well, that actually depends on how they're designed. Not all lamias are like Miia from Monster Musume no Iru Nichijou, i.e. human torso with arms on a headless snake body. There are lamias that are basically a snake with a human head, neck and breasts on an otherwise completely serpentine body, like post #1199552; that's definitely not centauroid in the slightest.

Likewise, not every mermaids is built like, say, Meroune Lorelei (again, from Monster Musume no Iru Nichijou), i.e. human(oid) until you reach the waist/groin area. You have examples like post #306790, post #209139, post #1176769 and post #2448301, where the mermaid's fish half is just a tail that's attached to distinctly human(oid) legs, rather than a tail and trunk attached to the human torso's waist/groin, with said legs sometimes going as far as a little past the knees. Again, not at all centaur-like.

As for post #347007, IMO it seems to follow the example of such human-hybrid creatures as satyrs, because she's basically a harpy with her lower body being entirely avian, as opposed to the likes of Papi, whose only avian features are her limbs terminating in avian wings and feet.

@iridescent_slime: > MarqFJA87 said: > > That's true. I'm just...

2017-09-28T20:21:36-04:00

MarqFJA87 said:

That's true. I'm just trying to illustrate that limiting the definition of centauroid so that the nonhuman body must be a four-legged animal/mythical creature is illogical.

I argued that if centauroid is interpreted to include arachne, the latter tag becomes unnecessary as it essentially becomes a centauroid spider_girl search. Since then I've come to see things differently. If we start bundling non-quadrupedal monster girls into this tag, then there's a slippery slope to using it for other variants with only two legs (post #347007) or none at all (e.g., lamia and mermaid). "Two or more pairs of legs" is just as arbitrary a distinction as "four-legged".

@MarqFJA87: > nonamethanks said: > > As a side note, I...

2017-09-28T19:40:03-04:00

nonamethanks said:

As a side note, I think the first post is fine with centaur + extra_legs, as it fits with the first tag's definition.

That's true. I'm just trying to illustrate that limiting the definition of centauroid so that the nonhuman body must be a four-legged animal/mythical creature is illogical.

@nonamethanks: > MarqFJA87 said: > > Yeah, that was the line...

2017-09-28T19:27:59-04:00

MarqFJA87 said:

Yeah, that was the line of thinking I had been operating on. There are also centaur-like creatures that are based on a six-legged version of the normally four-legged horse, such as post #859402. And the tag itself is already applied to posts with more than four legs, such post #2812588.

As a side note, I think the first post is fine with centaur + extra_legs, as it fits with the first tag's definition.

@MarqFJA87: > nonamethanks said: > > Centauroid probably...

2017-09-28T18:48:42-04:00

nonamethanks said:

Centauroid probably needed to be expanded to include bodies with more than four legs. It wouldn't make sense to have scorpion girls or variants with extra limbs (for example, a lion body with six legs, or post #1806922) separated in the context of the tag, unless a more encompassing one is created.

Yeah, that was the line of thinking I had been operating on. There are also centaur-like creatures that are based on a six-legged version of the normally four-legged horse, such as post #859402. And the tag itself is already applied to posts with more than four legs, such post #2812588.

@nonamethanks: > iridescent_slime said: > > Prior to your...

2017-09-28T18:04:07-04:00

iridescent_slime said:

Prior to your recent wiki edit, our definition of centauroid was restricted to four-legged animals, effectively excluding arachne. This tag probably wasn't intended to encompass every possible human-top/animal-bottom combination, as pointed out in forum #107242.

Centauroid probably needed to be expanded to include bodies with more than four legs. It wouldn't make sense to have scorpion girls or variants with extra limbs (for example, a lion body with six legs, or post #1806922) separated in the context of the tag, unless a more encompassing one is created.

@iridescent_slime: > MarqFJA87 said: > > An arachne is a spider...

2017-09-28T17:48:35-04:00

MarqFJA87 said:

An arachne is a spider girl whose human and spider body parts are in a centauroid configuration.

Prior to your recent wiki edit, our definition of centauroid was restricted to four-legged animals, effectively excluding arachne. This tag probably wasn't intended to encompass every possible human-top/animal-bottom combination, as pointed out in forum #107242.

@EB: If "centauroid" was meant as a catch-all tag,...

2017-09-28T17:36:02-04:00

If "centauroid" was meant as a catch-all tag, then centaur would imply it as well. I like the way the tag currently is only used for types that don't have an established tag.

@MarqFJA87: create implication arachne -> centauroid Link...

2017-09-28T17:30:48-04:00

create implication arachne -> centauroid

Link to implication

An arachne is a spider girl whose human and spider body parts are in a centauroid configuration.

EDIT: The tag implication arachne -> centauroid has been rejected by @Type-kun.