Timeline for Let's stop [chat]ting about it
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 8, 2015 at 5:21 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/super_user/status/618651170748399616 | ||
| Jul 4, 2015 at 17:47 | vote | accept | VL-80 | ||
| Jun 30, 2015 at 16:09 | answer | added | fixer1234 | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jun 30, 2015 at 15:44 | comment | added | Canadian Luke | @fixer1234 I go with a few set criteria for if I believe a tag should stay or go. If there is no good way for a set of experts in topic xyz, then get rid of it, as it adds noise. Surely they could add an OS, or at least the program name that they're using as tags. In this case, there are too many chat protocols and programs, that a single tag covering them all would be redundant | |
| Jun 30, 2015 at 15:42 | comment | added | fixer1234 | A number of the questions have the [instant-messaging] tag, which has the same meaning and is similarly meta but at least has a wiki summary. Is that an acceptable tag to retain? If so, chat can be synonomized or replaced where it wouldn't be redundant. | |
| Jun 30, 2015 at 14:58 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @CanadianLuke: In that case, it would be useful to replace the tags in questions about applications whose primary purpose is not chatting, with program-specific tags ([facebook-chat] already exists). There are also a number of questions like how to accomplish chatting under specific conditions (would require a software rec answer but could be asked in an on-topic way). What tag would be used for the function? | |
| Jun 30, 2015 at 13:37 | comment | added | Canadian Luke | I disagree, @fixer1234. Who are the experts in "chat"? What single set of programs by one manufacturer is "chats"about? Way to meta, I suggest burning it without prejudice | |
| Jun 30, 2015 at 3:16 | comment | added | fixer1234 | Granted, it's a bit meta and in some cases, might be redundant. However, it's a specific function that in many cases is a feature or add-in to an application for which it isn't the primary function. It serves a useful purpose in identifying the nature of the question and attracting the right people to answer. It could use some cleanup, but I think it's beneficial to keep. | |
| Jun 30, 2015 at 1:45 | history | asked | VL-80 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |