Here's why I think [tag:run] is not _necessarily_ a bad idea. Since the question didn't specify _why_ [tag:run] is a bad idea, I'm forced to speculate that it's because it's ambiguous. Here are some arguments _for_ the tag:

 1. Many new `linux` users struggle with the execution of binaries. This ranges from the need to `chmod` the files to prefixing `./`. A user who doesn't know how to execute a binary isn't going to know that they should tag the question with, for example, [tag:chmod].
 2. Executing a binary in `windows` is often not trivial. There can be a range of issues from compatability and missing libraries to permissions issues. Users might not always know what is causing the problem so expecting them to correctly tag the question with the specifics of the _solution_ is unrealistic (If a user knew that the problem related to a compatability issue they'd have solved 80% of the problem in many cases).

As to why it _is_ a bad idea; well it could mean just about anything. I don't think Gaurav's suggestion of a [tag:binary-execution] is a bad one; it removes the ambiguity with regards to what "run" actually means yet lets users still tag the question when the specifics of the root cause are unknown to them.