The bulk update request #230 is active.

create alias conkers_bad_fur_day (0) -> conker's_bad_fur_day (14)
create alias conker's_live_and_reloaded (0) -> conker's_bad_fur_day (14)
create implication conker's_bad_fur_day (14) -> rareware (40)
create implication berri (1) -> conker's_bad_fur_day (14)
create implication conker (14) -> conker's_bad_fur_day (14)
create implication miss_sunflower (0) -> conker's_bad_fur_day (14)
create implication the_great_mighty_poo (0) -> conker's_bad_fur_day (14)

Reason: Noticed it was missing when uploading Conker pics. Port from e621.

EDIT: The bulk update request #230 (forum #2606) has been approved by @Jelloponies.

Conker doesn't even belong to rare anymore since it was bought by Microsoft.

Conker Bad Fur Day on the N64 was released under the banner Rare, whereas the remake Live and Reloaded was released on Xbox under the banner Microsoft.

Therefore that forced implication game tag to a "company" does not make sense.

scout said:
Conker doesn't even belong to rare anymore since it was bought by Microsoft.

Rare is still a company, they're just owned by Microsoft.
Conker is a Rare IP.

scout said:
Conker Bad Fur Day on the N64 was released under the banner Rare, whereas the remake Live and Reloaded was released on Xbox under the banner Microsoft.

L&R is published by Microsoft, developed by Rare (as an Xbox Game Studios subsidiary), still has Rare branding.

scout said:
Therefore that forced implication game tag to a "company" does not make sense.

It's a port from e621. While you've made good points in the past, I'm still under the impression tag parity is ideally what's desired, and my BURs are simply a reflection of that.

sergalbutt said:
Rare is still a company, they're just owned by Microsoft.
Conker is a Rare IP.
L&R is published by Microsoft, developed by Rare (as an Xbox Game Studios subsidiary), still has Rare branding.
It's a port from e621. While you've made good points in the past, I'm still under the impression tag parity is ideally what's desired, and my BURs are simply a reflection of that.

I don't really understand your side. Why is tag parity so important for e6ai users exactly? Specifically for e6ai. In which case? I'm willing to argue on it, but anyone I've talked to trying to support the current e621 system hasn't mentioned any practical reason why it would also be good for e6ai. This is not a website about informing the general population about which character is owned by which IP, but rather just to share AI generated content that people can find easily. Searching by game studio, or copyright owner, or publisher, or even by game console doesn't have its place here. There's gonna be double standards everywhere where only some popular games are very well tagged with those useless forced implications while smaller studios won't even get a single wiki page about their own game franchise or their own "copyright tags" leading back to their studios.

I would agree with you that tag parity is important for general tags for training purposes; what you can actually see in the image. I could complement what's already posted on e621 and make content for the few e621 users to also browse content on e6ai the same way should they ever be supportive of AI art as well. Company names are not important in my opinion. Nobody is gonna search for "rareware" when they wanna see conker or banjo content.

I'm not even opposed to users freely deciding on their own upload to use studio names if they wish it so, but forcefully imposing the old e621 system "just because it's easier" is not a good reason. Not the way it's being done right now, with dozens of BURs on tags that don't even exist yet with the majority of its wiki page being empty. The right way to do it (and how it's mostly done on e621) is wait until some new tags are actually being used after they are added on new posts before deciding, as a community: "Hey, this tag should be made a copyright tag fox X reason and imply this and that". And BURs don't get approved in less than a week or two on e621 either; again, to let the general user vote freely before making decisions.

If E621 makes some janky changes or questionable decisions, we should just blindly follow through and not even take the time to question anything??

I've been genning for almost 2 years now; if you ever personally needed to use company names to get good results at generating AI art, then please feel free to give us some examples on why it was useful for you; because I can tell you it wasn't ever useful to me for sure.

In my opinion, any tag that is neither useful for training models nor is it useful for users to search content they want is just tag pollution that has no value.

scout said:
I don't really understand your side. Why is tag parity so important for e6ai users exactly? Specifically for e6ai. In which case? I'm willing to argue on it, but anyone I've talked to trying to support the current e621 system hasn't mentioned any practical reason why it would also be good for e6ai. This is not a website about informing the general population about which character is owned by which IP, but rather just to share AI generated content that people can find easily. Searching by game studio, or copyright owner, or publisher, or even by game console doesn't have its place here. There's gonna be double standards everywhere where only some popular games are very well tagged with those useless forced implications while smaller studios won't even get a single wiki page about their own game franchise or their own "copyright tags" leading back to their studios.

I would agree with you that tag parity is important for general tags for training purposes; what you can actually see in the image. I could complement what's already posted on e621 and make content for the few e621 users to also browse content on e6ai the same way should they ever be supportive of AI art as well. Company names are not important in my opinion. Nobody is gonna search for "rareware" when they wanna see conker or banjo content.

I'm not even opposed to users freely deciding on their own upload to use studio names if they wish it so, but forcefully imposing the old e621 system "just because it's easier" is not a good reason. Not the way it's being done right now, with dozens of BURs on tags that don't even exist yet with the majority of its wiki page being empty. The right way to do it (and how it's mostly done on e621) is wait until some new tags are actually being used after they are added on new posts before deciding, as a community: "Hey, this tag should be made a copyright tag fox X reason and imply this and that". And BURs don't get approved in less than a week or two on e621 either; again, to let the general user vote freely before making decisions.

If E621 makes some janky changes or questionable decisions, we should just blindly follow through and not even take the time to question anything??

I've been genning for almost 2 years now; if you ever personally needed to use company names to get good results at generating AI art, then please feel free to give us some examples on why it was useful for you; because I can tell you it wasn't ever useful to me for sure.

In my opinion, any tag that is neither useful for training models nor is it useful for users to search content they want is just tag pollution that has no value.

The best answer I've got to the purpose of what I (and FlowerSylveon) have been doing is what Technical-Grid said on the Discord
I've also been genning for about 2 years, and yeah, I've never personally used company tags to get "better" results, because I don't think it would really do much with that. My mindset with tagging is organisation and searchability, and I've always personally at least appreciated how thorough it is on e621
However, I did have an idea of how I will do my future (ported) BURs so the "necessary" implications (eg character->series) are separated from the types of tags you're arguing against, for the purpose of the voting system 👍

The bulk update request #230 (forum #2606) has been approved by @Jelloponies.