Viewing last 25 versions of post by Vox in topic 'Public*' tags should imply 'Public'.

[@Ciaran](/tagging/public-tags-should-imply-public/post/2653221#post_2653221)  
PSA excepted, those are open _*to_* the public, but not necessarily _*in_* public. The ones I listed — @`public use@` possibly excepted — are all by necessity things done in public. An implication allows this to extend to things that aren't necessarily outright explicit.


 
TL;DR: If it's not in @`public@`, it's not @`public sex@`, but a lot of the latter aren't tagged with the former when they should be. That said, I'd also like to see @`exhibitionism@` included in the implication.

PSA excepted, those are open _to_ the public, but not necessarily _in_ public. The ones I listed — @public use@ possibly excepted — are all by necessity things done in public. An implication allows this to extend to things that aren't necessarily outright explicit.

TL;DR: If it's not in @public@, it's not @public sex@, but a lot of the latter aren't tagged with the former when they should be. That said, I'd also like to see @exhibitionism@ included in the implication.

PSA excepted, those are open _to_ the public, but not necessarily _in_ public. The ones I listed — @public use@ possibly excepted — are all by necessity things done in public. An implication allows this to extend to things that aren't necessarily outright explicit.

TL;DR: If it's not in @public@, it's not @public sex@, but a lot of the latter aren't tagged with the former. That said, I'd also like to see @exhibitionism@ included in the implication.

PSA excepted, those are open _to_ the public, but not necessarily _in_ public. The ones I listed — @public use@ possibly excepted — are all by necessity things done in public.

TL;DR: If it's not in @public@, it's not @public sex@, but a lot of the latter aren't tagged with the former. That said, I'd also like to see @exhibitionism@ included in the implication.

My main concern is that public acts are receiving their respective tags, but _not_ the "public" tag"@Ciaran":/tagging/public-tags-should-imply-public/post/2653221#post_2653221
PSA excepted, those are open _to_ the public, but not necessarily _in_ public. The ones I listed — @public use@ possibly excepted — are all by necessity things done in public.

TL;DR: If it's not in @public@, it's not @public sex@. That said, I'd also like to see @exhibitionism@ included in the implication.

My main concern is that public acts are receiving their respective tags, but _not_ the "public" tag"@Ciaran":/tagging/public-tags-should-imply-public/post/2653221#post_2653221
PSA excepted, those are open _to_ the public, but not necessarily _in_ public. The ones I listed — @public use@ possibly excepted — are all by necessity things done in public.

TL;DR: If it's not in @public@, it's not @public sex@. That said, I'd also like to see @exhibitionism@ included in the implication.

My main concern is that public acts are receiving their respective tags, but _not_ the "public" tag"@Ciaran":/tagging/public-tags-should-imply-public/post/2653221#post_2653221
PSA excepted, those are open _to_ the public, but not necessarily _in_ public. The ones I listed — @public use@ possibly excepted — are all by necessity things done in public.

TL;DR: If it's not in @public@, it's not @public sex@. That said, I'd also like to see @exhibitionism@ included in the implication.