Spurious tag again?

[sir_pudding]

This thread has the tag "ducklings are cute" which seems irrelevant to me.

[robkelk]

Not any more, it doesn't. (Although I recall seeing that it did.)

But, hey... if somebody wants to waste one of their two tags on something that doesn't help with searches for similar threads, who are we to say "no"? Do tags use up a disproportionate amount of memory on the forum's server?

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by robkelk

Not any more, it doesn't. (Although I recall seeing that it did.)

But, hey... if somebody wants to waste one of their two tags on something that doesn't help with searches for similar threads, who are we to say "no"? Do tags use up a disproportionate amount of memory on the forum's server?

Dismissive tags sometimes act as a form of threadcrapping.

The Rev. P. Kitty has explained that the convention is that threads should only be tagged in a helpful spirit.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by robkelk

Not any more, it doesn't. (Although I recall seeing that it did.)

But, hey... if somebody wants to waste one of their two tags on something that doesn't help with searches for similar threads, who are we to say "no"? Do tags use up a disproportionate amount of memory on the forum's server?

It's either intended as some kind of vandalism or thread crapping. If threads have a large number of junk tags it will make it more difficult to see what tags it actually has. Plus, it's just annoying, IMO.