Content Tagging is Here!

I actually can't say I did, Real Shocker!



Keep up the good work pal!

My Crystal Ball is broke and I still saw it comming.

Everything went right over my head...

except for Ali Z

now that I understand

checkit

Why does there always have to be one person that tries to ruin it for everyone else?
I sure have not felt like this has been a "Waste of time" taggin threads, I have read alot of interesting posts from older threads and will continue taggin even after reaching the 25% mark, just because there are so many threads I have not yet come across!

Well if we did not have a few bad apples in the bunch, how would you appreciate the good ones.

Its the odd member that comes along like that, which lets you appreciate how good we all have it here on ATS. 99% of the members are always positive and open to discussion. Then we have the rare bad apple, that reminds us of how good the rest are.

personally I think we thank him.

Good point Chissler.

Well just for that I would give him a WATS award.......but cannot.......to late......Well..Thanks anyways Im a true sceptic.

Sorry, couldn't resist:
external image

Hat's off to all for the restraint displayed throughout. Just goes to show, "Some men just can't be reached..." nor reasoned with either.

TAG away!

Ali Z

I see law suits!

A couple of comments . . . have been tagging as indexing was an enjoyable part of my 6 years of library work. And, I habitually read a wide diversity of stuff so I'm keenly interested in anything that makes looking up topics easier.

1. I think the 30 character limit is much too restrictive. I realize there's lots of merit in having a diversity of taggers. However, 30 characters often limits to no more than 3-5 tags. Most meaningful tags that are more than one word long can take up the whole limit as one tag.

Perhaps it would be fruitful to the forum to allow those who have demonstrated a capacity and tendency to tag reasonably and well--sy by 25 or so good tags--would have the limit increased to 50 or 75 characters.

2. I put a tag on a Gore thread that I thought was simply factual because of a LOT of usage on FREEREPUBLIC.COM. After I'd clicked submit, I wondered if it might be misinterpreted as opinion or polemic or some such--which was not at all my intent. I just knew that a lot of people--particularly FREEPERS--would find "sore loserman" a very useful, practical tag. This was all the more so because the particular thread involved was highlighting Gore's unreasonably myopic, narrow, rigid, self-absorbed whining tendencies.

It's fine with me if such tags are removed. But I'd sure hate it--and not only because of the 1000 point penalty against points I don't have! LOL--I'd hate to be even perceived as trying to do funny crass stuff with the tags. Not my intent at all. Not my style on such an important task. I try hard to be objective, useful etc. as I would have with reference library tasks and duties.

But there are a wide variety of users who tend to look for threads and subjects FROM THEIR perspective and values. And, "sore loserman" is a handy shorthand that up to 200,000+ FREEPERS could easily use as a search term.

I don't know therefore what. Perhaps it would be helpful for taggers to be able to go back and edit their contributions OR ANNOTATE potentially questionable tags for the mods to consider in assessing such tags.

Thanks for a great website.

You make some very good points, and I'm glad to see your interest in helping get the content all tagged.
What you said about the 30 character limit has been a bit restrictive on some threads, especially some of the terror threads that have many long muslim or arabic names and a single persons name can take all 30 characters.

I have found a work-around by opening the same thread in multiple tabs using the Firefox browser, and then adding the appropriate tags. But I don't know if this is an approved method to use, or if it will get you a warning and penalty. Though I have used it a couple times without any repercussions, it may have just gone unnoticed by admin.

Is there a way of finding out how many threads you have tagged and how many over all have been done?

Just curiouse.

You can find out here

Just click on the top line where it says "show members who tag" and scroll down to picklewash

peace

edit to add that you'll need to allow the page to load, since there's over 700 taggers. You're getting near 100...good going.


[edit on 2-2-2006 by masqua]

thank you for your help.

I just tag as i read the threads, haven't got the patients to go searching lol.

You don't even need to search, Skeptic Overlord provided another nifty feature which gives you lots to do. Going through all the threads, one after the other, can provide you with plenty of good entertainment as you see threads that you never knew existed.

Taggers have mentioned saving certain threads they found so that they could return to them later and post. You might have noticed a lot of really old threads coming alive again...I think tagging is doing that.

People please stop tagging threads with stupid slang just to get your 5 freakin points for adding yet another rediculous tag that is helpful to no one.

here's a great example:

"gettin freaky wit teachy"

This is not proper thread content tagging

and I will edit out my threats of bodily harm, but I swear the urge to come through your computer and put this types of tag in your proper orifice is getting harder to resist!!

An easier method is the GRIPE/IDEA button...it's handy and gets results and you need not have to find handy orifices

Don't forget to include a link to the thread you found...you could use the very tag which provoked you to hit the 'hot button'.
.

think2much

It was I who tagged that.

The tag was relevant. I don't remember reading anywhere that slang wasn't allowed. I didn't call out or humiliate anybody. If the mods think it's inappropriate, well then I guess they'll remove it.

BTW, board cops should use the gripe/idea button.

Peace

I know it was you-and I didn't single you out or take it to you personally, like via u2u because I was just using that as an example and I am going off the deep end I realize, but I have seen so much content tagging crap that is not useful...stuff that people have to realize that it is unlikely that your use of slang to give a thread a funny tag is not very likely going to lead to other similarly tagged threads-which is the reason for tagging!

I am not saying slang can't be used, but an abundance of slang and funny tagging isn't useful at all!

So to clarify-I wasn't policing things or griping to the mods, but brought it to the tagging thread in particular so those who want to tag, are interested etc would see here that silly tagging, while not against any particular policy is not useful just the same.

[edit on 22-2-2006 by think2much]

I've tagged maybe twenty threads............TOTAL! Each one a varitable masterpiece.........like a fine watch, built to stand the test of time.

I will continue to try and be funny, it is the will of the people.

Peace

I edited, not timely enough in my last reply, to point this out, but I want to reply to your post too, just to clarify that I wasn't trying to single this person out or be trying to turn them in, etc and I did not use a link to the thread I found it in, for the very reason I was NOT trying to single this person out.

I merely just wanted to state for those interested in tagging-that an abundance of slang silly stuff isn't useful...it defeats the purpose when you realize what tagging is for...it's not for getting cheap points it's for referencing similar threads, so unuseful tagging is quite anoying to see...

I guess I should just ignore it...but I'm in a pissy mood today plus I thought maybe if I pointed out that it isn't useful and why people might understand in the future when they go to tag something and give it serious thought on how they could tag it to be actually USEFUL

Too much to ask?