[meta] Standardizing Tags
 

They're doing this over on the GURPS forum, and I though it was a good idea... especially since we aren't anywhere near as far into the process as they are.

Tags are useful for finding threads, but only if the tags are consistent - a mishmash of tags only helps Alaemon keep things secret. Thus, I propose a few standardized tags, based on what we've already got:

EDIT: Consolidated list here - keeping the old list as a historical artifact.


The category names from the In Nomine Collection, which should be obvious:

• artifacts
• discord
• roles
• skills
• songs
• weapons
• tips
• theories
• resources (which is a superset of artifacts, roles, skills, songs, attunements, and distinctions)
• humor

Terms that already have specific meaning in IN:

• canon for discussion that follows the Rules As Written; heretical for discussion that diverges radically from canon.
• superiors for any discussion about one or more Superiors. Add a specific Superior's name as a separate tag.
• word-bound for any discussion about one or more Word-Bound. Add a specific Word-Bound's name as a separate tag.
• a particular Choir or Band name for discussion of that Choir or Band.
• attunements for discussion of one or more attunements. Add a specific attunement's name as a separate tag.
• character for posting characters.
• setting for posting settings, or links to settings.
• cdau for matters of Canon Doubt and Uncertainty.

And, finally, meta for discussions (like this one) that are about the forum or the regulars instead of about the game.

Suggestions, additions, deletions?

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

It's a minor thing, but "music" might be a viable tag for threads such as "Music for the Superiors" or "Music for the Choirs/Tunes for the Bands." (Not to mention my own filk, already tagged as "humor.")

Alternatively, there could instead be a "pop culture" tag -- this covers not only the song-related threads, but situations like "Who would you cast in In Nomine: The Movie?" or "Superiors and their TV shows." Those kind of threads seem to pop up with a fair amount of regularity.

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

I knew I was forgetting something... I'll wait until more folks have had a chance to see the list before I update it, though.

Oh, and canon should be "Setting As Written", not "Rules As Written".

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

What about tags for topics brought about by people like me, who are still somewhat new to it all and are not sure what falls under what?

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

Tags aren't required... and anybody can add a tag to a thread. (The person who starts the thread can add more tags than anyone else.)

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

Out of curiosity, how would you tag something like my "pronunciation" thread, asking how to properly say the various Choirs and Superiors? Is that "tips," even though I'm seeking advice rather than giving it? Or does it fall under something else?

(Not essential; but I want to make sure I'm understanding the categories correctly. Overall, the list seems to cover most of the bases.)

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

I'd call it "tips", yes.

And I missed a big one: something for adventures, adventure seeds, and campaigns. Would "adventure", "plot", or something else be better?

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

I could flip a coin between the two. "Plot" covers more ground, but "adventure" seems more intuitive, even when it's campaigns being discussed.

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

I dunno...

When I see "adventure" I think the actual campaign. "Plot" to me covers the beginnings of a potential adventure.

Re: [meta] Standardizing Tags
 

Which is why I asked which term would be better... (Have to logoff now; back tomorrow to see what everyone else thinks.)