Forum tags - confusion (janet_rose)

Can we at least agree on things like

(1)  combining Chihuahua and Chihuahuas under Chihuahuas  and

(2)  fixing misspelled words so we don't have vaccine and vacine?

(3)  fixing obvious goofs like a tag that literally says "phrase1" "phrase2"  (quotes and all)

I might consider volunteering to do some of that if I knew how.  So far I haven't even been able to guess the syntax for searching on a tag.

I'm sure not saying that this is not something that will be needed at some point.  All I'm saying is that maybe we need to prioritize?

To ME, getting my notifications is right up there at the top of the list....but somehow I don't think it's at the top of anyone ELSES list!

My main concern is that if we start making a bunch of rules, we'll create more problems than we will fix.  But, maybe that's just me being gun shy?  And of course, us mods aren't the decision makers here.

glenmar

I'm sure not saying that this is not something that will be needed at some point.  All I'm saying is that maybe we need to prioritize?

Well, I don't have any admin/mod functions at this point.  So as long as someone can tell me how to edit the tags or how to search on a tag to locate the relevant posts, there would be no priorities lowered.  I am willing to abide by forum instructions.  I really can't see where someone would get upset with spelling corrections, making something a plural, or fixing someone's obvious goof.

Jaime didn't specifically say it was high priority, but she sure implied it.

glenmar

My main concern is that if we start making a bunch of rules, we'll create more problems than we will fix.  But, maybe that's just me being gun shy?  And of course, us mods aren't the decision makers here. 

The time to make rules/guidelines are when a feature is new.  Changes later cause the most problems.

Mods and Admins are the only people who can edit other people's tags, and I don't see that changing.  I'm not even sure that it would be possible, in terms of software capability, to arrange for a member to be able to edit tags and nothing else.

The new forums are harder to moderate for various reasons, and the mods have an extra workload now because we need to "police" the blogs as well, which weren't a factor before.  Of course, blatant abuse of the tag feature must be and has been addressed, but I am NOT in favour of editing the tags for any reason BUT blatant abuse.  In terms of grammar and spelling I think it must be remembered that there are members of this forum for whom English is not their first language and they are doing their best at communicating in a language which is not the most comfortable one for them.  Even for those who do have English as a first language their talents may lie elsewhere, and if we edit the tags for such things as spelling and grammar we'd have to edit the posts for it too.  There aren't enough hours in the day for that, even if the thought of it did not make me INCREDIBLY uneasy.

I proofread things for a living (amongst other things) so I am not going to pretend that bad English doesn't get up my nose just a little bit, but I also participate here, and Mod here, for fun and in my spare time.  Sometimes that translates into being here for hours every day, and I don't see myself being able to spend any more time here than I already do.  Making sure the posts and blogs are OK is, in my opinion, more important than micromanaging the tag feature.

Obviously, if I am outvoted by Admins I will make the time, as they are the ones who have the final say. 

I too am uncertain if this would even be a possibility.  That would be something to address with Jill B and Jaime.  I'm not objecting to additional help, because, as Kate pointed out, there is a lot more to do in this format, and fewer of us to do it.  But, our votes don't count as much as Admin.  Don't get me wrong, they certainly listen to our input, but they are the ones "in house" who have the inside track so to speak on where the company wants to go with this forum and how much control the company wants to be put in place.  And then there are softwear limitations which I won't even pretend to understand.  I'm not what you would call a techie, clearly, since I can't even get my own notifications to work consistently!

You are probably right that the time to put rules in place is at the beginning, but heck, the tags don't work properly at this point, so I'm not sure what good rules would do.  Are they even going to be remembered 2 or 3 months from now when stuff DOES work?

Benedict

if we edit the tags for such things as spelling and grammar we'd have to edit the posts for it too. 

Why?  I am not being contrary.  I really don't understand this statement.

glenmar

I'm not what you would call a techie, clearly, since I can't even get my own notifications to work consistently!

Don't feel bad.  I am a techie and I haven't gotten mine working either.   

glenmar

Are they even going to be remembered 2 or 3 months from now when stuff DOES work?

People may forget, but the computer won't.  If you go to one of your posts and click on "Edit Tags" and "Select Tags", you will see tags accumulating.  You can see the same list while creating a reply if you click on "Select Tags". 

Janet I think Kate means if someone spelled a tag wrong in tags (hip displasha), they likely spelled it wrong in their post too...and thus using a correctly spelled tag would not bring up the post it was attached to, which could potentially contain great info in the replies...unless we also edit the post.

Could be wrong, but that's what I am getting...and if that's what she means I totally agree.

I'd much rather review the tag list every couple weeks/once a month and pitch or correct the baddies.

I think (I'm not sure) if the list of tags were edited, the tag would no longer  "connect" to the  post.

For example, if someone put a tag on their post "hip displasha" that tag is attached to the post AND gets put on the list of tags. If you edit the list of tags, the actual tag on the post (where it says [edit tags] ) will still say "hip displasha", so someone would have to go find that post and edit the tags with the correct spelling so that it would "hook-up" to the word in the tag list. A huge undertaking.

Editing JUST the list of tags would break the connection between the tag on the list and the post it belongs to, I think) 

Post tag:   List of tags:

displaysia  dysplasia 

Yes, it would break the "links" and thus destroy the point of the tag feature to begin with.  That's the main reason I'm against it.

The other reason is that in terms of consistency either we decide we need correct spelling/proper grammar on the forum or not.  Since it's not feasible to insist on it, I don't think we can insist on it anywhere that gets user input.  Tags have to be spelled correctly, but posts or blogs don't?  The search function is intended to work on posts too, we can't *just* search by tags, so if we decide that in order to maintain the integrity of the tag feature they have to be spelled correctly, then the next logical step is to say that in order to maintain the integrity of the search feature posts have to be spelled correctly.  That would be a *massive* job and I feel uncomfortable with the idea anyway.  I don't want to go around editing people's posts for bad spelling and if I was a member who had issues with spelling, perhaps because of a medical issue such as dyslexia, I wouldn't be too thrilled about anyone going through my posts with a fine-toothed comb so that the search function would work properly. 

People pay me to make sure they've spelled stuff correctly and that apostrophes are in the right place, so they expect to be corrected.  I doubt anyone on here expects to have their skill with the English language called into question - and THAT'S if they have control over it.  As I pointed out above, there could be reasons why they don't.  Heck, I am not as careful here as I would be when working, because this is supposed to be fun and sometimes it's more important to get my point across than it is to make sure I have said "its" rather than "it's".  No one here expects to be corrected...and if we all did start correcting each other's English I think there would be an uproar.   

On another board I belong to, there are 7146 tags... that start with the letter "a"

Just for a different perspective. 

Benedict

Yes, it would break the "links" and thus destroy the point of the tag feature to begin with.  That's the main reason I'm against it.

What I had speculated about doing was using a "bad" tag to get to the post and fixing the tag there (but not touching the text of the post).  I had not even thought about editing the tag list itself.  Yikes, editing the list itself could potentially break a lot of things!  I had assumed that a tag with no connected posts would be automatically removed from the tag list.

Yeh, we will probably wind up with too many tag entries to keep up.  However, the more things we get in the tag list spelled correctly to begin with the less trouble we will have with spelling because the tag feature tries to finish the typing for you. 

The really bad tags that I have seen are the ones where someone used bad syntax in trying to create several tags, but wound up with one big tag.  Once we can search on tags, that should be easy to fix for them. 

Would it be easier if your first option when attaching a tag is to select one already used, not write your own?  Is that an option?  So, an "attach tag" button brings up a list of "likely" tags with check boxes or something like that?  A bit like the smiley function.... Maybe with a "create new tag" at the bottom.  Or is how it is the way it is and theres no way to change how it is?  Is that how it is?

The way it is at the moment, anyone who misspells "aggression" is going to get a very narrow list of search results.... and anyone with great advice on offer could be overlooked in future searches if they have misspelt a key word. 

I can appreciate its not a high priority but I just thought I'd make the suggestion.

There's that feature...if you click select tags. It also auto fills for you when you begin to type something in the tag box.