Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Proposal to ease tag maintenance

Parent

Proposal to ease tag maintenance

+8
−0

We should make it easier for trusted users to manage tags. Can we please have some feedback on the following ideas?

  • Creating tags directly (independently of a post): move from mod-only to anyone with the Edit Tags ability.[1]

  • Renaming tags: move from mod-only to anyone with the Edit Tags ability. Is that too dangerous (because it could cause confusion if people aren't coordinating)? On the other hand, an incorrectly-renamed tag can be renamed back to what it was; it's not a destructive operation.

  • Deleting unused tags: move from admin-only to mod-only.

I'm not proposing that we change deleting in-use tags (admin-only) right now, because that's a more destructive operation that probably needs some safeguards. Even people who have the ability generally don't use it. This is an area for further work.

I'm also not proposing that we change merging tags (mod-only) right now. This is a destructive operation.

But meanwhile, does lowering these other thresholds create risks that we need to address?

Note: I am aware that the Edit Tags ability can't currently be earned organically -- this is a long-known problem that we haven't fixed yet. However, moderators can grant abilities directly, so people can still have the Edit Tags ability, so we can meaningfully base feature access on it.


  1. Anybody (with Participate Everywhere, I think) can create a new tag by adding it to a post. Moderators also have a "new" button on the tags page, allowing them to create a tag without adding it to a post. Why would you do that, you might ask? This is helpful when building out tag hierarchies or preparing a set of related tags that you want to make sure follow the same naming convention. ↩︎

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

Is tag creation actually limited? (2 comments)
Post
+4
−0

This is perhaps a longer term solution, with slightly broader scope than the question, but I'm mentioning it for consideration since the question made me think of it. It still makes sense to implement the more specific changes suggested in the question in the meantime.

Trust, but implement undo

Non-destructive changes

Make tag management more reversible. If we make it possible to undo the changes that are currently considered destructive, then there will be less need to keep them admin-only or moderator-only. Even deletion of an in-use tag could be reversible.

Tag history

This should also make tags more auditable. Undo requires a history. If we keep a history for each tag, it will be easier to analyse incorrect usage of the tag management abilities (whether malicious or unintentional).

Trust more people

This may make it feasible to extend some of the tag management abilities to even more people than suggested in the question.

For example:

  • Deleting a tag that is in use (has live questions) is currently admin only. With undo it could be made available to moderators too.
  • Renaming a tag is currently moderator only. The question hesitantly suggests allowing users with the Edit Tags ability to do this too. With undo we wouldn't need to be as hesitant.

Note that new users would still need to earn the Edit Tags ability. Undo wouldn't mean trusting everyone immediately. It would just allow trusting a user a little sooner.

No more 5 tag limit

The problem

If a post has 5 tags, and then one of the tags is deleted (so it disappears from all posts), now the post has only 4 tags. This means another tag can be added to it, so it has 5 tags again. This causes a problem if the deleted tag is restored: It should now reappear on all the posts it disappeared from, but that would give this post 6 tags.

The solution

Removing the limit on number of tags removes this problem.

Now deleting a tag can be a non-destructive action that simply labels the tag as "deleted" in the database. Each post that previously had that tag still points to it in the database, but only live tags (those not labelled as "deleted") will be visible under a post in the user interface.

More reasons for no limit

The 5 tag limit is arbitrary and artificial - there is no reason to settle on 5 rather than 4 or 6. This is a vestigial artefact carried over from Stack Exchange, which we can discard when we are ready to.

There is such a thing as too many tags on a post, but how many is too many will vary from post to post. This is a subjective decision which should be managed by the community using human judgement, rather than being encoded as a fixed limit.

Other examples of where removing the 5 tag limit would be helpful:

  • A Meta post that already has 5 tags can have a "status-completed" tag added without having to remove one of the existing tags.
  • A Proposals post can have 5 tags in addition to its proposed community name tag, rather than Proposals posts being unintentionally limited to 4 tags.

As there is more than 1 reason to consider changing the 5 tag limit, I have also raised a separate Meta discussion Assessing the 5 tag limit.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

OK for most that you say, but I strongly disagree with "more trust+undo" policy. (7 comments)
OK for most that you say, but I strongly disagree with "more trust+undo" policy.
Lorenzo Donati‭ wrote over 1 year ago

I agree with some of your points, but I think what you propose is "icing on the cake". IMHO we can't afford it now because CD has few developer resources and the traffic is low. We can effectively cope with tags using other methods.

The only point I disagree with is "trust more+undo". Even if we had a ton of resources, that is a wasteful approach (it's SE way). Trust should be earned on the field showing commitment, expertise and responsibility (hence privileges). Otherwise we would waste resources cleaning up the mess some well-meaning user might cause. Janitorial work is not a lot of fun, so people having the knowledge to understand what's wrong should be spared that effort.

Note that a badly tagged question or a wrong tag wiki can be highly disruptive in a high traffic context It's a suggestion to other users to do the same, so it could snowball easily: you can't downvote a crappy tag WIKI, so people could use that tag a lot before a competent "tag manager" finds out.

trichoplax‭ wrote over 1 year ago

It's interesting that we're both using the same argument (reduce administrative burden) for opposite opinions. Sounds like this would need careful discussion before deciding where to have undo and where to avoid it.

Note that I'm not suggesting the undo functionality be implemented any time soon. I like your analogy of icing on the cake - there are definitely more important things to focus on first.

Since your objection is to the undo part of this answer, perhaps I should raise the removal of the 5 tag limit as a separate Meta question so discussion and voting can be more focused.

trichoplax‭ wrote over 1 year ago

I've raised a separate discussion on the 5 tag limit.

Lorenzo Donati‭ wrote over 1 year ago

trichoplax‭ Sorry if I didn't make myself clear, I'm not against your undo proposal, I'm against the combination of undo with relaxed trust requirements. In other words, for me undo is OK just as a tool for privileged users to rollback editing mistake. The issue for me is the possible relaxation of requirements to gain trusted privileges.

trichoplax‭ wrote over 1 year ago

I wasn't suggesting relaxing the trust requirements entirely.

I wouldn't want to give arbitrary abilities to everyone as soon as they join a community. I was thinking that some actions could be trusted to slightly more people than currently (as the question suggests, but with undo allowing taking it a small step further).

For example:

  • Deleting a tag that is in use (has live questions) is currently admin only. With undo it could be available to moderators too.
  • Renaming a tag is currently moderator only. The question hesitantly suggests allowing users with the Edit Tags ability to do this too. With undo we wouldn't need to be as hesitant.
trichoplax‭ wrote over 1 year ago

I've edited my answer to try and make it more clear and to include the examples

Lorenzo Donati‭ wrote over 1 year ago

trichoplax‭ Oh, well, then we are essentially saying the same thing. That's why I suggested creating a new privilege for highly trusted users.