[mod] *grrrrrrrrrrr*
Feb. 26th, 2010 09:15 pmI've noticed a rather disturbing trend of folks not tagging their posts lately.
I'd like to remind all of you to please TAG YOUR POSTS. (This is not just a suggestion, in case you were wondering.)
Tagging is not difficult nor complicated, and if you don't know how, ask. I will be happy to help and explain things.
Don't make me come up with a punishment system or sarcastic tags to put on the untagged posts. I have better things to do than go around reprimanding every single person who doesn't use tags on their posts.
Just tag your posts to the best of your ability, please and thank you.
I'd like to remind all of you to please TAG YOUR POSTS. (This is not just a suggestion, in case you were wondering.)
Tagging is not difficult nor complicated, and if you don't know how, ask. I will be happy to help and explain things.
Don't make me come up with a punishment system or sarcastic tags to put on the untagged posts. I have better things to do than go around reprimanding every single person who doesn't use tags on their posts.
Just tag your posts to the best of your ability, please and thank you.
Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 08:24 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 08:32 pm (UTC)Let's start off by quoting from the comm rules on the profile page:
I think that pretty much says it all, basically. If you have any specific questions or problems, please let me know.
Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 08:51 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 08:57 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 08:57 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 08:59 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 09:04 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 09:05 pm (UTC)insane boredomnimble fingers!Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 09:41 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-26 11:22 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-27 04:59 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-27 05:38 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-27 07:47 pm (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-28 04:54 am (UTC)Re: Tag Training
Date: 2010-02-28 11:02 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-26 08:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-26 08:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-27 03:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-26 08:58 pm (UTC)Second, I was half-expecting a "don't make me sic lavvyan on you" by the end there. ;)
♥
no subject
Date: 2010-02-26 09:03 pm (UTC)Also, I value your modly skills around here way too much to add to your duties. Though I'd love a pithy '!too sumfink to tag by myself' tag. I'd last about 15 seconds before tagging the posts with it, of course, but I'd really love it, in theory.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-26 09:05 pm (UTC)But I appreciate not having to do the tags. I hate tagging.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-27 09:33 am (UTC)I notice that a previous post of mine has had tags added to it. Specifically, [-john sheppard] and ['character related]. In an effort to better understand the tagging system - could you explain what those two tags are used for?
I've never used the [- john sheppard] tag because it seems like 99% of fic has John in it somewhere/somehow, which would mean every request would use the tag. Seeing as that would make the tag ubiquitous, I kinda felt like I must be missing something about when to use it properly. So I guess I'm confused as to when to use a [ - main character] tag. The same goes for the ['character related] tag.
If you could give me a brief rundown of the rationale for those tags, I'd be happy to try to use them in any requests I make.
Thank you for all your hard work on this! I really appreciate this resource and would hate to see it decline.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-27 05:09 pm (UTC)If I've added the 'character related and john sheppard tags to your post then it's no doubt because your request mentioned him by name as a character your request at least heavily leaned towards, if not directly centered on, specifically.
Basically, when I started the tagging system about a small age ago now, I had high hopes that lj would improve it's tagging system towards being more like delicious.com's was even back then, where [tag]+[tag] in the URL would list all the posts that matched BOTH tags, for example. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened, but as I've been tagging the comm's posts in a way that coincides with that logic (e.g. [character related]+[wraith] would in a perfect world show posts that asked for specific characters having something to do with Wraiths or a specific Wraith, let's say) I don't much see the point of stopping now. For one, there's hundreds of posts whose tags would need to be redone altogether, and for another, if my ADLS line (which might as well be mythical by this point) ever gets installed my vague plans towards archiving all the posts on delicious should become less vague and more a work in progress, and that process will have been made much easier by the existing tagging system.
Less than perfect reasoning, I know, but lj is what it is, and I guess it'll always be mea culpa for hoping it will improve any day now.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-27 05:49 pm (UTC)Not at all! This helps a lot. Just to be sure I'm on the same page - using the rationale above then you would expect every post to be tagged either ['genre] or ['character specific], correct? (In addition to whatever other tags are appropriate)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-27 07:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-02 06:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-02 08:15 pm (UTC)Also, you mean. Me like! :-D
no subject
Date: 2010-03-02 09:22 pm (UTC)Thank you, I try ))
no subject
Date: 2010-03-03 10:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-04 06:56 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-04 11:24 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-05 07:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-05 11:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-06 06:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-03-17 02:29 pm (UTC)