St._Araqiel commented at 2016-12-02 13:31:11 » #2058337

Lala-kun is ky~ooot.

13 Points Flag

Anonymous commented at 2017-01-16 15:12:07 » #2082431

This is not futanari. This is a dickgirl.

0 Points Flag

Anonymous commented at 2017-05-17 10:27:11 » #2129539

^True. As if anyone would listen though.

0 Points Flag

Jerl commented at 2017-05-17 11:08:06 » #2129542

Our policy is to tag based on what can be seen, and when important bits that would be needed to determine how to tag an image can't be seen, our policy is to follow a default assumption based on what's most likely to be the case.

In cases where it's impossible to tell whether an image features a full-package futanari or a newhalf because the testicles obstruct the area where the vagina would be, our policy is to assume that a vagina is there anyway and tag it futanari unless there is another image in the set that clearly shows no vagina, or the artist explicitly calls the image newhalf.

So, tagging this image as futanari is correct.

2 Points Flag

XerBlade commented at 2017-12-02 08:08:45 » #2188964

That logic kinda caves in on itself in that second paragraph. "Tag based on what can be seen" would normally logically mean "don't assume something is there unless you can see it," not "don't assume something is NOT there unless you can see its absence."

3 Points Flag