10
\$\begingroup\$

Today I came across this old question: Can our tag-prompt nudge toward including system? which I think is really great. It looks like nobody is taking action, though.

What is the process for editing a tag-prompt? What page does one go to? Can anyone do it? Just a diamond mod? Do we have to ask the developers for help?

\$\endgroup\$
  • 10
    \$\begingroup\$ I can tell you one thing for sure right now: the ability to do this, if it is even possible, lies above diamond moderators. Thank you for poking this, let me do some asking around and see what kind of answers I can get. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose Oct 29 at 16:40
8
\$\begingroup\$

We won’t be changing anything right now

The system restrictions around changing this field means that we have no realistic options for changing the tag recommendation text in a way that meets our goals. Our most practical option is to lock one of the tags to [dnd-5e], our primary suspect, but we will be unable to measure whether that has any practical benefit.

So, given the lack of good options, right now we won’t be changing anything.

We can’t change much except maybe making a tag suggestion static

Here is our current tag prompt when asking a new question:

an input field labelled “tags” with the text “e.g. (actions lore published-adventures)

It follows this format, with each tag randomly determined:

e.g (tag1 tag2 tag3)

According to two SE staff members, Catija and Shog9, changing the prompt can be done with developer assistance. However our options for making this change are very limited:

  • We can’t change anything outside of the parenthesis
  • We can make some/all of the tags determinate/static instead of randomly generated
  • We can have a combination of static text and tags (static or random)

No viable options for changing the text

Syntactically, that doesn’t really leave us any way to clearly indicate that users are expected to include a system tag if it is needed for their question and that there are a variety of systems to choose from. And that was the major goal of the change. So, there’s nothing we can do here to accomplish that.

As far as I can tell, the only thing we might find helpful to do would be to lock in one or two of our most troublesome system tags and hope that it helps people see to use them. However...

We need data for this change, and there’s no way to get it currently

Before considering any change, we need to find a way to measure the current issues surrounding missing-system-tag questions so that the effects of the change can be measured and so that they can be reverted if the change is not working. However, we’ve not yet found any way to make these measurements.

This is important because pinning a system comes at a cost of other tags that might have been displayed and a more philosophical cost of perhaps appearing to favor those systems as site-wide focuses.

Without a data source to measure success/failure and with no clear options for changing the text to accomplish the goals, we have decided the best course of action is to make no changes right now.

If anyone has any suggestions for measuring this issue (or for some solution we may have missed), please don’t hesitate to send it our way.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Would “maybe-some-system” as “static text” (that pretends to be a tag) within the parentheses be better than just picking some system? Am I reading correctly that this might be an option? (Still agree with the need for measurement, though.) \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Nov 13 at 14:56
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan That might be an option, yeah. Like e.g. (a tag describing your game and edition, tag2, tag3, etc) where tag2 and tag3 remain randomly generated tags. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Nov 13 at 15:26

You must log in to answer this question.

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