tag:danbooru.me,2005:/forum_topics/8206Covering nipples2012-07-03T17:08:47-04:00tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784992012-07-03T17:07:52-04:002012-07-03T17:08:47-04:00@user_358670: > S1eth said:
> You say covering_eyes, he says...<blockquote><p>S1eth said:<br>You say covering_eyes, he says holding_nose. <br>There's a difference between a breast and a face.<br>The nipple is the only feature of a breast you need to cover, a face has more than just eyes.</p></blockquote><p>Covering your face implies you are trying to hide the entirety of the parts. So does covering breasts. </p><p>Covering the nipples does not.</p><p>Also the areola are a visible part distinct of the nipples. </p><p>Hell just go with common usage. I don't think anyone else is actually trying to argue that covering your nipples is the same as covering your breasts. </p><p>As we have said, <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> is only an attempt to cover that specific area of the breast while <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a> implies the person is trying to cover the whole of the breast even if they fail to fully cover the <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link dtext-wiki-does-not-exist dtext-tag-empty" href="/wiki_pages/nipple" title="This wiki page does not have a tag">nipple</a>.</p><p>It's like many other body parts. Elbow and arm, knuckles and fingers, fingers and hand. </p><p>Holding/covering a part does not imply the whole and should never.</p>user_358670/users/358670tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784922012-07-03T13:14:54-04:002012-07-03T13:16:19-04:00@S1eth: You say covering_eyes, he says holding_nose. ...<p>You say covering_eyes, he says holding_nose. <br>There's a difference between a breast and a face.<br>The nipple is the only feature of a breast you need to cover, a face has more than just eyes.</p>S1eth/users/53985tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784902012-07-03T11:59:58-04:002012-07-03T11:59:58-04:00@Arrei: I don't think it always works the other way...<p>I don't think it always works the other way around, though. Even if covering the breasts typically means trying to cover the nipples as well, covering only the nipples doesn't mean they're trying to cover the entire breast. It's like, even though <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_eyes">covering_eyes</a> can be used in a fashion similar to <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_face">covering_face</a>, you can't call all situations where the eyes are covered to also be <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_face">covering_face</a> just because the eyes are part of the face.</p>Arrei/users/324239tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784562012-07-02T15:14:59-04:002012-07-02T15:14:59-04:00@S1eth: I made my stance clear already, so just quoting...<p>I made my stance clear already, so just quoting myself.</p><blockquote><p>S1eth said:<br><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> would implicate <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a>.</p></blockquote><p><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">Covering_breasts</a> is all about covering the nipples anyway.</p>S1eth/users/53985tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784552012-07-02T14:48:07-04:002012-07-02T14:53:03-04:00@user_358670: > Hillside_Moose said:
> I'd say if even one...<blockquote>
<p>Hillside_Moose said:<br>I'd say if even one hand is covering only the nipples, then the tag is applicable. It's something I would want when searching anyway.</p>
<p>Also, requesting an implication: create implication <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> -> <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a></p>
<p>Reason: Specific subset of <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a>. This implication would also chain to <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering">covering</a> as well.</p>
</blockquote><p>I disagree.</p><p>The nipples are part of the breasts yes, but they are still a distinct body part. Also the intent is different. </p><p>It would be like saying <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link dtext-wiki-does-not-exist tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/holding_nose" title="This wiki page does not exist">holding_nose</a> should be a subset of <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link dtext-wiki-does-not-exist dtext-tag-empty" href="/wiki_pages/holding_face" title="This wiki page does not have a tag">holding_face</a>.</p><p>Quickest example I could find.</p>user_358670/users/358670tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784522012-07-02T13:23:10-04:002012-07-02T13:23:10-04:00@Arrei: Hmm, I don't know about that. While they're...<p>Hmm, I don't know about that. While they're part of the breasts, it seems like <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> would be used for a different purpose. Like, they're not really trying to cover the breasts as a whole, just obscuring a part of them.</p>Arrei/users/324239tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784052012-07-01T20:57:40-04:002012-07-01T20:57:40-04:00@Hillside_Moose: I'd say if even one hand is covering only the...<p>I'd say if even one hand is covering only the nipples, then the tag is applicable. It's something I would want when searching anyway.</p><p>Also, requesting an implication: create implication <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> -> <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a></p><p>Reason: Specific subset of <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a>. This implication would also chain to <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering">covering</a> as well.</p>Hillside_Moose/users/85307tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/784022012-07-01T20:47:01-04:002012-07-01T20:48:55-04:00@MyrMindservant: What about images like post #1195135? With her...<p>What about images like <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/1195135">post #1195135</a>? With her left hand she is only covering the nipple, but at the same time she is using her whole right hand to cover the other breast.</p>MyrMindservant/users/206050tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/783692012-07-01T11:07:48-04:002012-07-01T11:07:48-04:00@jxh2154: Yeah, tag makes sense. And as Moose found,...<p>Yeah, tag makes sense. And as Moose found, using whole hands would not apply. If they're using a whole hand they're already covering as much as they can.</p>jxh2154/users/1309tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/781562012-06-20T06:26:30-04:002012-06-20T06:26:30-04:00@MyrMindservant: I went ahead and populated the tag according to...<p>I went ahead and populated the tag according to discussion here.</p><p>Hope it wasn't too early, but even if it was it shouldn't be too hard to change everything.</p>MyrMindservant/users/206050tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/781122012-06-18T12:57:52-04:002012-06-18T12:57:52-04:00@Hillside_Moose: After thinking on it some more, I changed my...<p>After thinking on it some more, I changed my mind on adding <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/337813">post #337813</a>, <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/128309">post #128309</a>, and <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/251897">post #251897</a> to <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a>, since they're using their whole hands to cover the breasts, rather than the teasingly bare minimum to cover the nipples. Tagging a two-handed approach to covering breasts may be worthwhile, but it's beyond the scope of the proposed tag.</p>Hillside_Moose/users/85307tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/781002012-06-18T06:48:05-04:002012-06-18T06:48:05-04:00@jjj14: > piespy said:
> Do they need to be covered by...<blockquote><p>piespy said:<br>Do they need to be covered by her hands or would something like <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/841139">post #841139</a> apply as well?</p></blockquote><p>I think that would apply.</p>jjj14/users/106784tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/780972012-06-18T05:57:24-04:002012-06-18T05:57:24-04:00@piespy: Do they need to be covered by her hands or...<p>Do they need to be covered by her hands or would something like <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/841139">post #841139</a> apply as well?</p>piespy/users/9685tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/780742012-06-17T12:18:25-04:002012-06-17T12:18:25-04:00@Hillside_Moose: covering_breasts was originally used for...<p><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a> was originally used for covering with two hands, with the combo search <a class="dtext-link dtext-post-search-link" href="/posts?tags=breast_hold%20covering">breast_hold covering</a> used for the one-armed variant. However this was admittedly unintuitive, and after a while I stopped caring to fix it.</p><p>So long as <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> use the OP examples, as well as <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/314475">post #314475</a>, <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/337813">post #337813</a>, <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/128309">post #128309</a>, and maybe <a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/251897">post #251897</a>, it should be fine.</p>Hillside_Moose/users/85307tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/780712012-06-17T10:28:32-04:002012-06-17T10:28:32-04:00@S1eth: covering_nipples would implicate...<p><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> would implicate <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a>.<br>And yes, it's VERY subjective, as many characters have breasts too large to cover.</p>S1eth/users/53985tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/780642012-06-17T05:48:15-04:002012-06-17T05:51:30-04:00@user_358670: I see a distinction between the two so +1 to...<p>I see a distinction between the two so +1 to the <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> tag.</p><p><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> to me is intended for just that. The characters is only trying to cover their nipples and nothing more.</p><p>It's seems more sexual in nature.</p><p><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a> on the other hand is the character trying to as best they can cover the entity of their breasts.</p><p>It's more of an embarrassment issue.</p><p>While neither is hard and fast and both are subjective, I do agree they are distinct enough concept wise.</p><p>Also the act of <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a> might not actually <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link dtext-wiki-does-not-exist dtext-tag-empty" href="/wiki_pages/cover_nipples" title="This wiki page does not have a tag">cover_nipples</a> all of the time. </p><p><a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/1153989">post #1153989</a></p><p>She is trying to hide her breasts but a nipple is exposed.</p>user_358670/users/358670tag:danbooru.me,2005:ForumPost/780532012-06-16T19:14:18-04:002012-07-03T17:07:52-04:00@Cyberia-Mix: post #977947
post #1145505
Covering the...<p><a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/977947">post #977947</a><br><a class="dtext-link dtext-id-link dtext-post-id-link" href="/posts/1145505">post #1145505</a><br>Covering the nipple(s) alone when more could be covered.</p><p>I can see why this tag was deleted as it gets increasingly ambiguous with the breast size, but we made it clear in the past that tags shouldn't be deleted without prior forum discussions.</p><p><a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_breasts">covering_breasts</a> is a pretty broad tag and <a class="dtext-link dtext-wiki-link tag-type-0" href="/wiki_pages/covering_nipples">covering_nipples</a> is a useful subset to have IMO.</p>Cyberia-Mix/users/227562