There are 3 followers and 136 questions for tag .

The tag itself is very broad and seems to be useless.

Thus, let's get rid of it.

  • 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.
    – fixer1234
    Jun 30, 2015 at 3:16
  • 3
    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 13:37
  • 1
    @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?
    – fixer1234
    Jun 30, 2015 at 14:58
  • 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.
    – fixer1234
    Jun 30, 2015 at 15:42
  • 1
    @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 15:44

1 Answer 1


We have an tag that has this wiki summary:

Real-time chat software, services, and protocols such as ICQ, Yahoo Messenger, and MSN Messenger.

To me, that is similarly meta. However, I happen to think it's useful to have a way to identify this function.

Chat / instant messaging is often an add-on feature of various applications that not everyone uses or is familiar with. Identifying that the question is about this aspect helps to attract the right people to answer, and saves time for people who would be attracted to the application but have nothing to contribute on chatting.

There are also a number of questions where people are asking how to accomplish the function of chatting under specific conditions. There needs to be a way to identify that function in a tag.

I disagree that all uses of a chat-related tag should simply disappear. Some alternatives:

  • Replace with in places where the existing tag is not redundant or irrelevant and the [instant-messaging] tag is not already used.
  • Synonomize with
  • Create application-specific chat tags like the existing for applications where chat is not its primary function.
  • 2
    What about SO's chat API? Jul 3, 2015 at 15:49
  • 1
    @IsmaelMiguel - Make a new tag specific to that. Jul 13, 2015 at 3:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .