Tags don't really reflect content

Continuing the point above. Here is a set that I tagged and the only tags I can give it are "brunette" and "outdoor". 

https://www.elitebabes.com/long-haired-konstansija-a-strips-to-shows-off-her-figure-44656/

However, despite having less tags than the one above, the set is infinitely better than the one above as there's a lovely picture of her with her smiling with her legs wide open. This is what I'm thinking when I'm busy tagging sets. There's real no indication of quality of a set, which in my opinion should be the MAIN objective of going to the trouble of tagging galleries.

I must have corrected a thousand sets already where some lazy contributor has just added a single tag to a set, mostly "blone" or "asshole". How does this really help the search for lets say "blonde". I get blondes showing nothing, blondes like Hayley's Secret just showing tits and then some blonde with her legs spread and a dildo up her arse. I know which of these three I'd much rather look at. 

If I understand you correctly than you want to rate each gallery on a scale of explicitness. We kind of thought of this, but only sort galleries with tag hardcore, if any sort of sex is involved. I guess you would like it to be more granular like:

Hardcore
Masturbation
Posing with legs spread
Posing fully nude
Posing half nude
Dressed

Something like this?

I was unaware of the implementation of Hardcore as a searchable tag, so that certainly is a useful resource when using the searches with tags

BTW, the tag search should be probably available on the "Search" menu item on the "3 horizontal bar" menu list icon, in addition to the current text search implementation. 

But getting back to my point. Yeah, some sort of categorization would be good. If I had to draw a line in the sand, then the most important thing to me in a set is that the model is clearing showing her slit. Anything pictures, regardless how good the model is e.g. Corinna from femjoy, is significantly less interesting to me than if the model is not prepared to show some gash. I'm not here to admire the artistry of the photographer or the innocence of the model, I'm here to see pussy. And if there's no real clear view of a pussy in a set, then I'm generally moving on pretty quickly. I'd say the pictures I get off on contain 98% of the time some sort of view of a models pussy. 

So, I was thinking about the tag "asshole" recently. What it is basically a guarantee that you're going to see an asshole. But that's the only tag that has that function. There are no tags saying "tits" meaning "this set contains exposed breasts". There's just "big boobs" and "small boobs", but that is no guarantee that you're going to see some naked melons. Perhaps the tag "pussy" meaning "her slit is clearly exposed" would solve the problem I am describing. At the moment, "trimmed pussy", "hairy pussy", "masterbation" don't really tell you if you're going to see that slit or not. 

Of course, as the site owner, it's up to you to figure out what's best for your site. I personally think having tags that help finding explicit material easily is a definite selling point. The implementation could be quite granular as described above, but realistically, what percentage of the searches are going to be for "dressed" and which are going to be for "Posing with legs spread". Therefore I'd probably be going with a simpler implementation such as "Hardcore", "Pussy visible" and "Softcore". Whereby hardcore has it's current definition, "pussy visible" means clearly visible i.e. not just the front view of the leading edge of her clit and softcore is everything else. 

Thanks for engaging in the conversation. 

cheers

mb

Another example of what I'm talking about. Just tagged the set below. The only reasonable tag I could give this set was "brunette". She doesn't have big or small tits. She's not doing anything with her pussy. It's not in a pool, she's wearing nothing etc, etc. So she only gets the nondescript "brunette". But she is flashing gash. There is something there worth looking at. However the tags don't reflect that. 

https://www.elitebabes.com/vanda-b-liefde/

 

Posted by: MasterBlaster

↑

The implementation could be quite granular as described above, but realistically, what percentage of the searches are going to be for "dressed" and which are going to be for "Posing with legs spread".

I agree, that probably only a small group of users would need categorization that granular. Hardcore, Pussy visible and Softcore should be enough. The problem is, that the tags Softcore and Hardcore are not narrow enough. We would get thousands of wrongly tagged galleries. Thats the reason why we didnt add hardcore as a tag suggestion option. We are going to overhaul the tag system this year, adding a hundred more tags. We can add 'Pussy Exposed', but probably not Softcore.

If you going to overhaul the tag system, can you please give us some advance notice as to what you are doing? It might influence the tags we choose now. 

I will.