We should consider relegating fate to being a super-tag for Fate games, but prefer to use the tags for specific published RPGs like fate-core, dresden-files, and diaspora instead.
Why? Because I've had enough experiences answering a question tagged "fate" with what I thought was a canonical answer, only to find that it was specific to a particular book I was familiar with, to realise that there is no such singular thing we can call "Fate". I've had this happen with fate when I was answering based on Diaspora, and I've had this happen with fate-core when answering based on Dresden Files RPG, to mention only two. The fact of the matter is that there is no "Fate RPG", only a family of Fate games, each different in exactly the sort of details that we get questions about.
This is analogous to our d20 tag: rarely can we properly answer a question based on merely "it's a d20 game", since our answers are almost always going to be specific to whichever game the asker is actually playing, whether it's D&D 3e, 3.5e, Pathfinder, or one of the myriad games derived from the d20 SRD. (And to drive it home more, D&D 4e is technically a "d20 system" game! Just like Strands of Fate is a "Fate system" game; yet both are their own, entirely distinct beasts from their distant siblings.)
This is exactly the situation we find ourselves in with Fate games: we need to know which game you're playing, since an answer about (e.g.) who gets spent Fate points is going to depend on which published book you're using to play. (Example: the answer to What happens to the fate point after a character invokes an aspect? (DFRPG) is different from the answer to Who can earn fate points from invoking attached aspects? (Fate Core) due to changes in how the GM handles Fate points.) Since the corner cases are the sort of things we get questions about, it makes more sense to treat fate as a rarely-used tag for questions that apply to every game, and to prefer RPG-specific tags for all other questions.
Effectively, what has happened is that Fate has just gone through the same process that GURPS did in 1986: something that was previously published as an embedded system in other games has been published as a stand-alone generic RPG. (What eventually became GURPS began as a book named Man to Man in 1985.) The only difference is that there's such a volume of "Fate" games that came before that we've got mental habits about how "Fate" relates to all these RPGs, mental habits that are no longer accurate and don't agree with reality.
Fate Core has an entirely different relationship to other Fate games than what we previously called "Fate" does: "Fate" as we knew it is a sort of amalgamation of inferences about the "core" system of multiple distinct, disagreeing RPGs. And worse, which RPG we used as the authority when books disagreed kept shifting, changing the answers to questions as our guesses about this nebulous "fate system" had to adjust. Now, Fate Core is the authority on what the Fate (analogous to GURPS) system actually is, but it's still a distinct game from its parent RPGs, Spirit of the Century and Dresden Files RPG. Answers for Fate Core are no more applicable to "Fate" as we knew it, or to DFRPG, than answers for Pathfinder are applicable to D&D 3.5e or AD&D: i.e., answers for one only apply to the other where they just so happen to agree or where importing rules makes sense, but each game is its own master and doesn't change its RAW based on the other. As time goes on, Fate Core will become the basis for new specific RPGs, but each will differ by how they use and change the rules in Fate Core, just like how games based on the d20 SRD are different from D&D 3.5e, and questions about them can almost never be answered based on knowing D&D 3.5e. This new status for Fate Core as "first among equals" will be more obvious as time goes on, but we can start rearranging how we think of Fate games now.
So, to repeat myself, due to this fundamental shift in the relationship structure of the Fate games, we should tag questions according to which RPG is being played (Fate Core, DFRPG, SotC, Diaspora, Legends of Anglerre, etc.), and leave the general fate tag for questions that are truly applicable to all Fate games, such as How to explain stress tracks to new players and the question about escalating Aspect invocation that kicked off this discussion.
The disadvantage of tagging this way is that you can't track all Fate-based games now just by subscribing to the fate tag, but then, who subscribes to d20 and expects to get all questions about D&D 3.5e, 4e, and Pathfinder? I think we will actually find separating the games from the fate tag to be valuable, since we will stop seeing so many answers that are wrong simply because someone is answering based on their experience with a different Fate game.