Oh there's no edit button, oops. Well I just wanted to add that you don't have to be worried about malice/confusion to want this fixed — just normally, when I share a post, part of what I want to be sharing is the author's cute tag jokes!! And when I make cute tag jokes, I want people to see them!
I also would like to second making the original tags visible somewhere within a share, even if it's by clicking a dropdown menu or something. But yeah, being able to see both the tags made by the OP, and the ones made by the person that shared it within the same post would be cool.
Probably not super high priority, but still.
Worth noting that cohost handles this exactly the same way tumblr does. If you reblog a tumblr post, the original poster's tags are replaced by your own (or are removed entirely if you don't add anyway).
That said, I do think the ability for the OP's tags to persist through shares could be helpful, though I'm not sure how I'd want it to be implemented. Tumblr has developed a culture of screenshotting important tags from previous posters (the OP or subsequent rebloggers), which seems like something that could be improved by a built-in tool. (On the other hand, if they wanted it to persist through shares, maybe they'd just put it in the post itself!)
I do like the idea of them persisting - not as actual tags so you avoid the filling the tag feed problem, but like a quote slug attached to them
I agree with the notion that if I wanted something to be persistent I would put it in the post and I wouldn't want to clutter shares with blocks of my organizational and fandom tags. But it could've been interesting if maybe they were available under some kind of dropdown
i think that giving OP the option to make their tags persistent across all rebugs is a good idea, if only as a stopgap for the issue i've seen cropping up on this site -- that NSFW artists often tend to opt for the tags to describe the themes of their pieces, including ones that are contentious or that one might want to avoid. (it's my belief that this is more common than it maybe has to be presently, because the CW field is less obvious than it could be.) this has led me to the trouble of manually re-adding tags to many of my rebugs of NSFW art, lest someone following me have absolutely no idea what lies behind the 18+ warning. i've personally thought, for this reason and also just to differentiate a post you've seen from one you haven't, that titles should show up above the 18+ warning, but that's very much a separate issue than the one being talked about here and probably warrants its own separate discussion.
I absolutely hate this idea because of this specific phenomenon, which I'm sure will only get worse as more tumblrs join. I don't want to have to scroll by excess content in a post. If you really want OP tags, just copy paste them manually.
And before you ask, no, there are not TOS rules against spamming tags with extraneous things.
I think having an "Original Post Tags" dropdown could solve the issue of people adding a wall of text worth of tags. It's still there without needing to go to OPs post, but it's easy to ignore if you don't care about tags.
But tag spamming like what Eurydice showed is something that we should be able to report for sure.
+1 on the original post's request. by default, shares contain *no* tags from the original, apparently, even when they're blank posts. this could cause problems for people trying to muffle specific tags, because even if it muffles posts based on (invisible) tags of what they're boosting, it isn't obvious to the user what tags the post even has that could be muffled if they want to hide things they'd rather not see! not to mention, losing the visible tag information on a share means you're losing out on part of the experience of the original post.
it happens to blank shares too, Sparkle. you share a post while adding nothing to it, just to share it, and all the tags just vanish. that is what I meant by "blank posts" here. how do you not see that as a UX issue?
I do see one though!
as far as I'm concerned, someone adding tags directly to a post who isn't the original author is something that, in cohost's structure, shouldn't be done at all. an empty share should just pass the tags along visibly as-is.
a chained post, where people have added more posts below it (stapled, whatever you want to call it) should include the tags that were originally on the post visible on said original post in the chain, and any new tags added should be visibly attached to the posts below it that added them. the post is appearing in the chain as a result of it being directly referenced anyway, the tag information should be available in the database. this is not how tumblr does it, and thank goodness for that; we shouldn't have to emulate tumblr's nonsense clutter in order to make the tags usable to people either.
and given all this, I may finally be able to see the joke-tags you added, along with ones usable to actually search for the post, when something of yours gets shared to my page. because right now, I see nothing, as when someone shares a post they pretty much never add tags. why would they? it takes extra effort! the easier the site is to use, the more likely people are to just keep on postin', and that's good to me.
I've recently learned the bizarre fact that if you share a post, the author's tags will not be shown to anyone seeing the share. Even more bizarre, if you add tags to the share, they will be shown on the post in the exact location that the author's tags would have been if the post weren't a share!
A tag often carries vital contextual information about a post. People used to tumblr are not going to suddenly understand that this isn't allowed here; it's common to see tags used as additional little comments and jokes, and in some cases to indicate things like "this is a joke" that might not be otherwise obvious to everyone.
Hiding those tags when shared doesn't make any sense and opens up all kinds of possibilities for confusion and sadness. _Replacing_ them with random other tags added by the sharer is frankly dangerous. A vague angry post could be easily made to look as though it is targeting an individual the original author has no problem with, etc.
I understand that if you know how cohost works, you can tell from the top bar that this is what is happening. But I've been using the website heavily for a couple weeks now and had no idea until it was pointed out explicitly in a post I happened to see; I don't think a very high percentage of new users are going to figure this out.
I really think this is a terrible, terrible misfeature. Please fix it!!
26 people like this idea