Skip to main content

View Diary: Tagging: Last-name-only tags are BAD! (83 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Hilarious trivia: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ek hornbeck

    Use 2008 elections as a tag when talking about the elections in 2008, and 2008 only when talking about a non-election topic or event that requires a year tag to distinguish it from the same thing happening in another year. 2007 elections should be used for this year's elections in Virginia, Louisiana, and other places.

    This is something the tag librarians have imposed upon Markos against his wishes - his original intent was that for elections in a given year you'd only need to put the year, because given the site's focus on elections it should be obvious that this referred to elections.

    •  I remember that. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sardonyx

      The beauty of them is you can't quite tell how people will self identify.

      Then there is the finding thing issue.

      But the #1 problem is the go slow and you would think there were technical solutions.

      Thanks for letting me bend your ear.

    •  Best of both worlds (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ek hornbeck

      If you specify the 2008 tag URL you get diaries using that exact tag only; likewise with 2008 elections.

      However, if you enter "tag=2008" into the Search, you get all tags that start with 2008, which is effectively what Markos wanted in the first place.

      The problem, of course, is that people use the 2008 tag for that year's State of the Union, budget, White House Correspondents' Dinner...and pretty soon you have hundreds of diaries that aren't talking about elections at all, but the myriad byways of politics.

      I always feel a little guilty when I add that "elections" to a Markos tag of "2008"...but not that guilty.

      © sardonyx; all rights reserved

      by sardonyx on Thu Jul 05, 2007 at 10:55:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is what... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sardonyx

        the not() operator is for if there is enough noise to be distracting.

        •  True (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ek hornbeck

          up to a point. After the third or fourth iteration, and a fourth or fifth addition of yet another "not" operator, I'd be getting more than a little frustrated...

          © sardonyx; all rights reserved

          by sardonyx on Thu Jul 05, 2007 at 11:18:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hmm.... (0+ / 0-)

            That's the main problem with Google- too much firehose.

            It is too bad we don't have the kind of programmable search engines you find in brief, vi, or emacs.

            I would suggest a more unique primary search term and you can group them with ().

            So this or that but not this and that together is eminently findable.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site