Posted in

#2926 by savagetiger
2022-07-10 at 23:04
< report >What does that even mean? Tag names have to be understood without having to look at the description.
Just tag them with short hair and sidehair. Not every hairstyle needs a dedicated tag. It doesn't belong under bob cut anyway. And tomboyish doesn't work when it's a hairstyle that also applies to guys.
#2927 by beliar
2022-07-10 at 23:26
< report >Yeah, this proposal makes no sense. There is very little difference in the trait Catboy wants to create, and no one will be able to use it correctly, mixing it with Sidehair.
#2928 by catboy
2022-07-11 at 01:42
< report >It is a very common hairstyle in anime, visual novels, etc. though. Having the longer "sidetails" diminishes the point of "short hair," doesn't it? The sidehair can be very long, but the back hair still has to be much shorter.

As for the tomboyish part: That is just the style name, I didn't come up with that name myself. That's why "Longer Sidehair" may be a better name idea. If absolutely needed, we could always say "Sidehair Longer than Back-Hair" or something, but that's way too long in my opinion.
#2929 by catboy
2022-07-12 at 19:25
< report >Personality > Pragmatic should have alias "logical"
#2930 by catboy
2022-07-20 at 22:15
< report >shouldn't Role > Parent Act have the aliases "mother act" and "father act"?
#2931 by catboy
2022-07-21 at 03:56
< report >Can Role > Guard become applicable for characters who are knights but aren't classified as any of the ones under it?
#2932 by Ileca
2022-07-21 at 04:48
< report >You mean like Role > Knight?
#2933 by catboy
2022-07-21 at 14:58
< report >#2932:

No, no: more like a guard of a gate (a gatekeeper), or a guard of a specific area that isn't a police officer at all. Not a medieval or royal knight, but the kind of guard you often come across in fantasy stories or mythology
#2934 by Ileca
2022-07-21 at 22:46
< report >I see, like the dad of Main. It seems Role > Security Guard is to be used for that.
#2935 by catboy
2022-07-26 at 01:31
< report >shouldn't Personality > Non-Binary be under "role" and not "personality"?
#2936 by myou
2022-08-01 at 18:34
< report >I'm resurrecting my proposal from t3314.1870 one last time. Please read it to see my detailed arguments, but to sum it up, I want First Grader... etc. to be renamed Elementary School First Year Student through High School Third Year Student according to the Japanese system, with by default up to 6 years of elementary school, up to 3 years of middle school, and up to perhaps 4 years of high school (so, one additional trait, out of consideration for non-Japanese school systems; more additional traits could be considered if there are enough significant character examples).

To elaborate with an example, under the current trait model Role > Students by Grade, an American high school freshman (called a "ninth grader") if given the Role > Ninth Grader trait would be categorized under the Middle School Student trait; this would adjust that by putting an American high school freshman under the same trait as a Japanese high school first year, although the American freshman would have had one less year of school in total. I previously made a follow-up post responding to some of the perceived issues related to making changes to these traits: t3314.1876 . Of the four people who responded to my proposal, only warfoki seemed to disagree with it.
#2937 by catboy
2022-08-01 at 18:58
< report >Honestly, I've always thought the "students by grade" roles were only used for western visual novels, while the "high school student" was used for eastern ones (unless they're swapped around in the game, obviously).

I was surprised to find out this was incorrect.
#2938 by flowerno9
2022-08-01 at 20:04
< report >The Personality trait "Unlucky" (Personality > Unlucky) needs to be removed from "Lucky's" (Personality > Lucky) child traits. The reson why is self-explanatory.
#2939 by desann
2022-08-03 at 22:53
< report >I think description for Subject of > Sexual Re-orientation and Subject of > Sexual Orientation Discovery should be changed - it says that "reverse scenario... is much rarer in fiction due to the negative real world connotations", but I pretty sure that all cases of that in japanese VNs that I've seen were "lesbian -> straight/bi" and Japanese don't care about "real world connotations".
So may be it will be better to remove third paragraph entirely from both descriptions and just add "...or vice versa" to the end of second paragraph?
So it will be something like
A character is subjected to consensual approaches that over the course of the VN makes them discover a new sexual orientation.

The usual case involves a gay character approaching a straight person, and seducing or manipulating them (without using outright illegal techniques) into becoming gay, or vice versa.

Sometimes the change is not full, and the character becomes bisexual, instead of completely changing their orientation.

Or may be even change it to two traits - one "gay -> straight", and another "straight -> gay"? Because to be honest when I look into character with traits "Homosexual" and "Sexual Orientation Discovery", I can't say which one it is.
#2940 by catboy
2022-08-05 at 01:43
< report >Shouldn't "child abuse" be under Subject of > Domestic Violence? Or am I misunderstanding?
#2941 by shinytentacool
2022-08-06 at 00:20
< report >I'm confused on something. Body > Big Breast Sizes says it cannot be directly applied to characters but there's plenty of characters that have that trait, as seen by this search

I assume this is just an automated "we know they're big, but not sure how big" placeholder and if so, are users supposed to fix this to the proper size, and if so is apparent size relative to head good enough to gauge what size they belong in?
#2942 by armony
2022-08-06 at 15:50
< report >#2928
Yeah, this hairstyle seems both common and distinct enough to deserve its own trait.

Honestly, I'm not sure why "sidehair" trait exists in the first place, since for anime girls, it seems to be more of a rule than an exception. It's kinda like the deleted "average height" trait and the likes, you can slap it on like 90 percent of female characters in the db. It also seems overly specific at the same time, because it describes only a small portion of the characters' hair that on a real person would be able to come in and out of existence at any given moment, because it can be easily put behind their ears, or blend with the rest of their hair depending on the position of their head.

Moreover, people misuse "sidehair" all the time by putting it on the rare female characters that DON'T have it, like most girls with bobbed hair:
link they? The description of the trait is so vague that I honestly can't tell¯\_(ツ)_/¯
#2943 by Ezezin
2022-08-06 at 15:54
< report >
I'm not sure why "sidehair" trait exists in the first place
For the same reason Body > Pale and Hair > Straight exists.

Edit: I could be wrong, but I think the idea behind those super common traits is to use them with other super common traits or filters to find more specific characters.Last modified on 2022-08-06 at 16:00
#2944 by catboy
2022-08-06 at 16:51
< report >
Yeah, this hairstyle seems both common and distinct enough to deserve its own trait.

Right? I even put examples in the trait description yet it was denied. I personally love seeing characters with this hairstyle, it's one of my favorites in anime because it's cute. I can see myself searching for it using filters on here.
#2945 by Ileca
2022-08-06 at 23:27
< report >Please add Otokonoko, 男の娘 and Femboy to Body > Trap.
#2946 by weter
2022-08-08 at 10:41
< report >Engages in (Sexual) > Sexual Fantasy, Subject of (Sexual) > Sexual Fantasy - we also need the tag like Only Sexual Fantasy, which means that the character has sex scenes only in fantasy or imagination, because there are somehow enough characters with whom there are no actual sex scenes but only fantasies and it is impossible to understand it without reading the vn itself and in the end it's very frustrating
#2947 by mebiuss
2022-08-28 at 16:42
< report >I suggest Not Sexually Involved should not be used to tag characters that only appear in all ages visual novels as that makes so all characters would be tagged, making the tag meaningless as the visual novel would already be tagged with No sexual content.
I suggest the tag be employed exclusively to mark characters appearing in visual novels with erotic content that don't take part in sexual activities as the name of the tag itself suggests.
#2948 by Draconyan
2022-08-28 at 17:26
< report >I'd prefer if it applied to every character regardless of whether he or she appeared in an ero VN, as it makes searching a bit easier, but in either case I'd like a mass tagging or de-tagging based on the outcome of the decision.
#2949 by Draconyan
2022-08-28 at 17:48
< report >Double posting since it's a separate issue:
I proposed the trait Personality > Illiterate, but then I found out the trait Personality > Uneducated already exists. I suggest to add "illiterate" as an alias (or to make the former a child trait of the latter).Last modified on 2022-08-28 at 17:50
#2950 by mebiuss
2022-09-01 at 01:05
< report >#2948
Having the trait on characters that only appear in all-ages visual novels makes it so you have a big SHOW SEXUAL CONTENT button up top, which you press only to see that someone went out of their way to tag a single person with Not Sexually Involved for absolutely no reason.

This makes so if someone was looking for an all-age novel for their kids they'll certainly be intimidated. And on the other side of the spectrum if someone's looking for sexual content they'll always see that "show sexual content" tab even when there is none.
This overreeching use of the tag is bad for everyone.