Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
No description provided.
@Background Pony #CA04
YES
Yes.
Keep it just a tad less personal, please.
Wait long enough to sober up, then, ‘cuz this pic is so obviously lesbian shippin’ that only a serious drunkard could miss it.
Jest waking up and I made a number of errors… I need to wait longer before typing.
….. So you are mocking me for something in was never talking about.
I WAS TALKING ABOUT IMAGES GETTING TAGED AS SHIPPING WHEN I HAVE SEEN A GOOD NUMBER OF ONE THAT ARE NOT BE TAGGED AS SUCH!
Is that so hard for you to understand?
Or do you mean to say “I think we should tag what we want even if it’s a tag that has nothing to do with the image”?
So your for tag vandalism, I should of known. I’m just mock you for somthing you didn’t say as you seem fine to do that.
Oh, I wasn’t even weighing in on this pretty obviously being a shippypic and therefore needing a shipping tag, I was just mocking the NightJack dude for raging against “shipping” when he clearly meant to type “lesbians” instead.
This is one of those “if someone has to explain to you what ‘pornography’ is, maybe you shouldn’t be trying to argue about porn” kind of things. It’s a ship pic, yo.
I know, right? It should not happen.
Case in point, >>462711 it was uploaded with the tags for shipping, it’s not shipping and you can tell just by looking, and if the uploader ad the tags there as a joke, it wasn’t funny.
Look, I’ll admit I was wrong here, but my point about how just looking isn’t really how you tell if it is shipping is still true, I have seen way to many images get tagged as shipping image when the are not, so some seem to see any image of two ponies as shipping.
Oh I’m betting the hint was there, you just chose to misinterpret it like in the case of this picture. Also, if what the creators/artists intended was so crucial, shipping wouldn’t exist at all.
Okay that’s the problem here…
>all you need is your eyes,
Ya and from that a number of non-shipping images have been tagged as one.
Sorry but that’s not true that all you need is you eyes, and “more then enough hints”
once again there HAVE been image where people would see hint of shipping that turns out WASN’T THERE.
Really. That’s funny, because you failed to get the proper context before you removed the shipping tag. And mostly, unless the artist comes over and explicitly says this or that, all you need is your eyes, and this picture has more than enough hints to tag it, even without reading the url.
Believe me. I know when to call it shipping and when not to.
The very reason I say you can’t just go calling it a shipping image, it might not be, you need context of what the artist intended.
You know what? If anyone is going to question a need for a shipping tag, they should read the comments on this: >>303995. Comments such as “They must be gay because they’re standing next to each other!” are annoying and I end up enjoying an image less.
Yes but sometime someone will put a tag they think is appropriate for an image but it really isn’t, you saying that make them right to put a tag that is actually inappropriate?
@TexasUberAlles
Oh sure, I hate guys when I’m all for gay marriage and I’m bi.