I think members creating a thread should be discouraged, or even

  • Thread starter Thread starter tiny-tim
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Creating threads with tags may be counterproductive, as current usage often leads to a plethora of unanswered questions rather than useful information. New members might assume tags are essential for getting answers, leading to excessive tagging that clutters searches. It is suggested that tags should only be added after a question has been answered, ideally by experienced members, to enhance the relevance of search results. Many users believe the forum's search engine could categorize threads more effectively without relying on user-generated tags. Overall, there is a consensus that the tagging system needs reevaluation to improve its utility for members seeking information.
tiny-tim
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
25,837
Reaction score
258
I think members creating a thread should be discouraged, or even banned, from inserting tags.

A tag search should reveal useful information, but at present it reveals mostly a lot of questions on the subject that haven't been usefully answered.

I suspect that new members think that the tag facility wouldn't be there if they weren't intended to use it, and that using it will help them to get an answer … some seem to insert as many tags as possible.

However, I suspect that nobody looking for a thread to help on actually uses the tags to do so … that the tags are actually used only to find answers, rather than questions!

IMO, it would be better if tags were only added after the question had been answered (or during the answering), once it has become clear that the thread will be helpful to readers studying the subject. And perhaps only by Homework Helpers and above.

But maybe I'm wrong about how people use the tag search facility? :redface: What do other members (helpers and helpees) think?​
 
Physics news on Phys.org


This is probably the stupidest thing that I've ever posted, but I honestly don't know what a "tag" is. I've used links to ImageShack, and addresses to other posts, but I have no clue about tags. :redface:
 


Danger said:
This is probably the stupidest thing that I've ever posted, but I honestly don't know what a "tag" is. I've used links to ImageShack, and addresses to other posts, but I have no clue about tags. :redface:

When you create a new thread, you have the option to use up to five different "tags", which are keywords that, when somebody uses the search function, will hopefully direct the searcher towards your thread.
 


I never bother with them and surely the search engine that comes with the forum (or the google one) would be able to categorise threads a lot more efficiently than some of the tags I've seen on some posts.
 


Thanks, Ant.

Out of respect, I would normally address you as "Mr. Freeze", but that brings up visions of Schwartzenegger that are best forgotten.
 
I want to thank those members who interacted with me a couple of years ago in two Optics Forum threads. They were @Drakkith, @hutchphd, @Gleb1964, and @KAHR-Alpha. I had something I wanted the scientific community to know and slipped a new idea in against the rules. Thank you also to @berkeman for suggesting paths to meet with academia. Anyway, I finally got a paper on the same matter as discussed in those forum threads, the fat lens model, got it peer-reviewed, and IJRAP...
About 20 years ago, in my mid-30s (and with a BA in economics and a master's in business), I started taking night classes in physics hoping to eventually earn the science degree I'd always wanted but never pursued. I found physics forums and used it to ask questions I was unable to get answered from my textbooks or class lectures. Unfortunately, work and life got in the way and I never got further the freshman courses. Well, here it is 20 years later. I'm in my mid-50s now, and in a...
Back
Top