Okay, let's start reviewing our bad tags. Currently no one has a clear idea of what is about; proof is this tag was the 2nd entry in the original version of the excerpt rally and has since then survived 30 revisions. Yet, it claims 178 questions!

This is probably because the tag is overloaded with two broad meanings:

What should be done about this tag?

  • en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janus
    – badp
    Feb 27, 2011 at 23:51
  • The fact that it survived so long without a tag wiki is a very bad sign. I agree with you (and Mana, and Grace) that this tag should be killed with fire.
    – Oak
    Mar 2, 2011 at 18:50
  • @Oak At this point the only thing stopping me is that, as you know, there's no "kill with fire" button we can press on for tags.
    – badp
    Mar 2, 2011 at 19:15
  • btw @badp killing it with fire might have interesting consequences.
    – Oak
    Mar 2, 2011 at 19:40
  • @Oak Hoenstly I don't think tzenes likes being the champion of a meaningless tag.
    – badp
    Mar 3, 2011 at 20:07

2 Answers 2


So, not long after the much regrettable death of as reported in the obituaries, the tag has been cleaned out from the site.

  • Finally that stupid meaningless tag is gone from my top 3 tags on the Users page. Nov 16, 2011 at 20:50

This tag should be removed entirely. The fact that the tag is overloaded with two broad meanings implies that it will continue to be used for these two broad meanings, regardless of what definition we might agree is more appropriate here; not every user will have the patience nor the time to peruse the meta site or know about the tag wiki. Every time I've come across the tag, I've been forced to venture to meta to see if we have some kind of consensus on how it should be used. I should be able to surmise at a glance the definition and approximate usage of a tag; that I am unable to do so with implies that it is a poor tag and that it should be destroyed. Mercilessly.

I would use for the Nethack question you brought up and for all other questions where strategy is used as a term for plan, not genre. If we wish to continue using a different tag for the genre, we must also take pains towards tagging other games with their genres; the tags and are not being used to their full extent, limiting their usefulness. I'll bring up this problem with genre tags in another meta question.

  • 2
    Honestly I'd kill [tactics] too, but that's just my opinion.
    – badp
    Feb 28, 2011 at 0:34
  • @badp Out of curiosity, why? Just not very useful, or do you have concerns about ambiguity?
    – Mana
    Feb 28, 2011 at 0:35
  • 4
    @Mana IMHO it's just part of that family of tags that just say "hey, this post is a question!" like how-to, tips, guide, etc.
    – badp
    Feb 28, 2011 at 0:37
  • @badp Fair enough; I think Grace shares your opinion on that so those tags might not be long for life.
    – Mana
    Feb 28, 2011 at 0:40
  • 2
    right this is a classic meta tag symptom blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/08/the-death-of-meta-tags Feb 28, 2011 at 4:48
  • @Jeff Thanks for the link, I'd forgotten about that one.
    – Mana
    Feb 28, 2011 at 4:55
  • 3
    I think we're better off with a bunch of tags that are a lot more explicit than "tactics". It simply doesn't tell you anything because it is so wide and overarching. For example, "boss-fight" tells you it is a question about a strategy to defeat a boss or otherwise do something about a boss. "achievements" tells you it's strategy towards getting an achievement. I think that model serves us a lot better than the highly vague "tactics", "how-to", and similarsuch.
    – Grace Note StaffMod
    Feb 28, 2011 at 12:24
  • See also for using tactics versus strategy, and the original discussion.
    – Grace Note StaffMod
    Feb 28, 2011 at 12:26
  • @Grace That's true, nice point.
    – Mana
    Feb 28, 2011 at 12:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .