« first day (3303 days earlier)      last day (144 days later) » 

12:00 AM
Again, sorry if all of this seems, you know, too extra on my part. It's just... I guess I was concerned over the candidates who were nominating themselves in the election phase
> "I think hermeneutics should be less academic and more popular without losing scholarship. It should help participants to get closer to God and not just to satisfy the curiosity of the inquirers. This platform has the potential to serve as a unifying force for common Christian beliefs based on the formal process of objective and logical argumentation. Do not underestimate this. No such potentially unifying global platform has ever existed in the history of Christendom."
In one sense, yes I agree, Biblical Hermeneutics SE shouldn't be intimidating for newcomers (that was the sense I got here). I mean, I largely avoided this site for a while because it felt very intimidating with all the fancy Greek and Hebrew and citations, etc. But all the same, to say that the site should be less scholarly diminishes the point of Stack Exchange
 
Sure. It's kinda the struggle.
 
It is. Seeing fancy dead languages shuts down a lot of people's brains down
 
My thought is that the text and its interpretation should be accessible to all. I kinda think of it like Stephen Hawking's A Brief History of Time for the Bible.
 
@JonEricson Right! I guess it would require a tremendous amount of effort per question though, considering one needs to analyze the context, meaning, and its relevant translation all the while keeping it succinct enough to avoid the wall-of-text effect
 
Yeah. We don't often succeed. ;-)
 
12:13 AM
It's probably super difficult unless you have a PhD in the field :P
Anyhow, going back to tagging, do you mind if I do some more snooping around the site and propose a method of tagging? Again, I don't know exactly how the community is going to react to that, but doesn't really look like anyone else is interested
 
Please do!
 
Considering that that question hasn't been answered for 8 years
 
 
3 hours later…
2:45 AM
@JonEricson Okay. In the process of writing a full length response (about half-way through), by here's the Tl;DR I'll be starting with, so you can point out anything that needs clarification, is dubious, or something I need to expand on
> - My philosophy in tagging is "less is more". Tag what is essential for the question to make sense, tag what is essential for people to look back and reference to in the future. Avoid creating excess tags, because *somebody* has to write the excerpts, and also, you only have five tag spaces anyways. Those tags better be good.
- In general, secondary tags in Biblical Hermeneutics should be somehow related to the TEXT itself. Whether these are questions on the text translation of the text (e.g., language tags, translation version tags, etc.), textual intricacies (e.g. grammar, word study, f
If anyone else has any feedback as well, I would love to here some as well
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Why not? There's no limit to how many tags we can have, only how many can be applied to a question.
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Excerpts don't need to be written. Often they don't serve any use. I see no reason to remove person or topic tags.
What's the actual problem you've identified with this site's tagging customs until now?
 
@curiousdannii I go more in-depth about why we should use person tags in my meta response, but there's a lot of inconsistencies in how they're applied, and I think it confuses the scope of the question
@curiousdannii Inconsistencies and redundancies
Why tag a question as and ? Why tag something as when the question has nothing to do with Jesus?
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr By all means point out specific inconsistencies and redundancies, but to propose a complete overhaul of tagging (which removing dozens of tags would be) you'd better have some excellent reasons
 
@curiousdannii The problem is that this site doesn't really have a tagging system
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Because some questions about Luke would also concern the other synoptic gospels. Canonical studies are an important part
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Only in your opinion. An opinion that's rather insulting to people who have spent years editing and retagging questions here.
 
2:56 AM
@curiousdannii What exactly is the tagging policy here?
 
No doubt there are some badly tagged questions. Questions tagged "Jesus" that have nothing to do with him should have that tagged removed. That doesn't imply an overhaul is justified.
@PrinceNorthLæraðr I'd summarise it as: 1) tag the book of the Bible 2) tag a translation if that's relevant, or greek/hebrew 3) tag an approach to interpretation (source/textual-criticism/historical/etc) 4) add anything else you think is relevant and that might help you find other related questions
 
See stipulation #4 is where most of the problem lies
 
Tags don't determine the scope of questions. They are indexing tools.
Well, like on all sites in the network, anyone with enough rep points can make their own tags. We trust that most people will use their own judgement to tag in a helpful way. And on occasions when there are disputes we take it to meta.
 
Right, so I can just tag something as and let people duke it out over meta?
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Sure, though I don't think anyone would
 
3:01 AM
@curiousdannii Anyone would use the tag Enoch or no one would duke it out on Meta?
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr I don't anticipate any disagreements over an enoch tag that would need a meta discussion
 
@curiousdannii Agreed, but it still begs the question of when to use people tags then
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Is "when a question is about the person" not enough?
 
@curiousdannii A cursory look through the "jesus" tag seems to reveal that a some of the questions are because Jesus spoke the word, while the other are because it deals with the topic of Jesus
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Indeed, unsurprisingly a lot of the Bible is about Jesus in some way ;)
 
3:05 AM
That's news to me. The good news :D
I don't know. There just doesn't seem to be a clear policy on tagging- in fact tags basically look like they don't really matter
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Well, arguably they don't matter very much. This is true on most network sites. But they're often useful for filtering searches
 
But questions like these because the OP essentially posted three of the exact same tags, they missed two arguably more important tags: NLT and Greek
Is the "demon" tag really necessary?
Does one really need Pastoral, Pauline Epistles, and New Testament?
@curiousdannii I don't know. Tagging matters a lot on Literature SE. But that's probably because one of the moderator started as a prolific tag editor
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr No, so I just retagged it
 
Doesn't it need to Greek tag as well, or no?
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr I guess so... though it's arguably more about cultural context and stuff
 
3:13 AM
@curiousdannii I don't know, like I've said, I'm new here so (shrugs)
 
Rather than starting a meta discussion, it might be better if you just started suggesting some tag edits. That will both make an immediate impact, and if any of them are rejected it will help you get a feel for what the community does and doesn't want its tag system to be
 
Tag edits as in tagging questions or editing tag wikis?
 
By all means, do start a meta discussion though if you think it is really warranted
@PrinceNorthLæraðr editing the questions on tags. Or tag wikis if you want, though few people ever read more than the tag wiki excerpts
 
@curiousdannii I meant excerpts :P. No one really seems to cares about the wiki, mostly because it's just so unintuitive in its presentation
 
 
18 hours later…
9:13 PM
@PrinceNorthLæraðr Which meta response?
 
@JackDouglas Not posted yet. I'm having second thoughts about finishing the post
 
ah — I was going to ask you what you think the purpose of tags is, but thought I should check out your post first…
but seeing as you haven't posted it, what do you think the purpose of tags is? :)
 
Well, a tag serves multiple purposes
 
I can think of two, but I'm open to the idea there might be more
 
1) It easily identifies what the question is about
2) Helps people in the future to see questions related to said tags
3) It allows experts to either be notified if a certain question asks with a question with that tag or to find questions which include that tag
Let me think
The two primary functions are identification and back-tracking (is that the right word?)
 
9:18 PM
your (3) is one of my 2 — for me the other one (which is a bit debatable) us that it might help Google searches
 
Hm, so site traffic. Never considered that
 
back-tracking? not sure what you mean
navigation?
 
See past questions with the same tag
 
gotcha
btw, I like ;)
no wait, I like and that's entirely different!
so which of the main 'usefulnesses' of tags is currently impaired by the tagging system here?
 
Considering site traffic I guess people tags aren't bad but I'm still left with whether they're necessary. I couldn't really find a tagging philosophy here
@JackDouglas I think point #3 might be impaired by the tagging system. Some questions are either missing vital tags (such as language tags) in favor of tagging with bunch of the same tags
 
9:24 PM
@PrinceNorthLæraðr right so the tag limit plus prioritising the wrong tags
not sure how many Qs actually have 5 tags though
 
Fair point
 
I have my doubts about — very broad tags are inherently less useful than narrow ones IMO
 
Of course, you don't want to get too narrow either
Otherwise, it might start to form unnecessary hierarchies.
 
well, you need at least two questions to have the tag for it not to disappear, which is not a very well known fact
we currently have none for
 
@JackDouglas Ah, I'd forgotten about that
@JackDouglas Made up a tag for the sake of argument
I guess the main problem isn't perhaps with the tagging system (the community seems to be doing fine with its general methods of tagging), I guess I'm just confused because its very vague
 
9:27 PM
sure, but my point was going to be that I could ask two good questions about enoch and I think it would be worthy of a tag if I did — though it isn't a hill I'd want to die on
 
Sure. But when do you use those tags?
 
I guess a plain search for 'enoch' would be good enough if I was looking for them all
and 'watching' a tag like that would be fairly pointless
so yes, maybe I agree with you a tag can be too narrow too
 
I was talking more like over just ? I understand there are big differences between the two, but quote shog9
> "Please resist the urge to create an unnecessary hierarchy in the naming of tags, or create tags that are excessively specific. Unless history would mean something completely different when paired with bible than when paired with, say, law, there's no need for this. You can let the tags stand alone, apply them when needed, and let the system give you bible history and law history questions.

Same thing goes for interpretation. Combine it with bible or catechism or apocrypha or whatever to give it context."
 
Now I definitely think you are making sense
though you spell prophecy differently to the BH way ;)
 
Ah. Didn't even realize :P
 
9:34 PM
I'd suggest instead of — part of the problem there is just unnecessary verbosity
and the slightly broader scope doesn't do any harm I think
 
I'm not a hundred percent against . I do understand that there are people who specialize in Messianic prophesies and plenty have legitimate PhDs in the subject.
I'm not sure if it's necessary to create a messiah tag for that. But I would think maybe (though I do have my issues with the Jesus tag BUT) and prophesy should easily convey the same meaning... though I guess Jewish users would disagree
 
they can search for questions tagged and — double barrelled tags are a code smell for me (except for book names)
ok we basically said the same thing there
 
specific suggestions like these are really useful on meta — I think more useful than the "let's change everything" sort of posts which never get everyone behind them
you can have an end goal in mind but getting there is sometimes one step at a time :)
 
True. But this doesn't really resolve the main question I have on mind which is "when they're supposed to be used, and how it should be used, and why it should be used"
See like this pending suggestion here: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/32518
 
9:41 PM
Are you a big fan of neat rules? There are always the edge cases and grey areas. It would be nice to have a list of principles on meta somewhere though, if that is what you mean.
 
@JackDouglas I am a fan of neat rules, but I do know that no tagging system is perfect. With that being said, I would just like to see principals here though
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr yuck
@PrinceNorthLæraðr ask for them on meta and make all the election candidates answer ;)
 
We have two contrasting opinions on the review queue, but the reason for the rejection is because it was.. "deviating from authorial intent"? Because I removed two tags that basically said the same thing?
 
> Questions about specific texts should only be tagged with the name of the text
> Questions may refer to narratives unique to a gospel or shared between gospels.
neither of those tags should be on that question
 
That's exactly why I removed them
 
9:46 PM
sure
I just approve-voted both edits in the queue
 
Oh, thank you
 
on a site like this we probably just need more passionate people who are engaged on Meta and manning the review queues :)
I mean part of the underlying problem here is just tagging that most of us agree is bad but haven't got round to cleaning up
 
Well, I don't mind tagging stuff, but I do need a baseline. I'll ask on Meta again rather than proposing an overhaul
(though I do think it probably needs an overhaul)
The thing is, the tagging philosophy question was asked like 8 years ago, with zero responses
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr which one?
 
4
Q: What is our tagging philosophy?

Jon EricsonJeff Atwood says, "It is my strong belief that the tags page is an essential map of what your community is, and is not, about." Many sites have a primary set of tags that categorize questions. On Arqade, those primary tags are the only tag most questions carry. It's easy to see the site is abo...

Four upvotes, zero responses, 189 views
 
9:49 PM
The question title there seems a lot broader than the body
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr (One response is deleted, but it would probably be a bit disappointing. ;-)
 
Good to see you around, Jack. ;-)
 
Hello Jon :) I got here via Twitter in a roundabout way
 
@JonEricson Well, my response didn't save like I thought it would. I guess it's God telling me not to go through with the way-too-long response
 
9:52 PM
Twitter. The devil's own social media network.
 
I couldn't disagree more!
@PrinceNorthLæraðr I think there is probably room for a new, 'What is our tagging philosophy?' question that is actually asking for a broad overview of the philosophy/principles here
 
@JackDouglas Okay.
 
I'm mostly kidding. I think Twitter is more manageable than Facebook.
 
The problem is, even if there is a community consensus, we would need to crack down on actually implementing this
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr yes it is one extra piece in the puzzle for those who want to help, that's all
 
9:55 PM
@JackDouglas I feel like it'll be closed as a duplicate... how should I title it?
@JackDouglas Hehe, puzzle
(My main account is Puzzling SE, that's why)
 
@PrinceNorthLæraðr something to mark it out a not a duplicate, maybe "What are the overarching tagging principles we want to apply here?"
 
Great title. Stealing that
 
@JonEricson You mean for self-promotion in particular?
that's certainly a devilish use of Twitter/FB
but anything can be twisted…
 
Nah. For avoiding getting dragged into conflict. FB is terrible if I let it be.
 
I actually didn't know FB was like that — I only joined a couple of years ago and have about 10 friends
I find the FaceBook UI incomprehensible
 
10:01 PM
I just avoid having any forms of social media. Consumes too much time from what I've seen
 
Speaking of which I just realised what the time is here, off to bed :)
 
I got into a fight a few years ago with a friend of a friend. My friend was incredibly apologetic when we talked in person. He felt so bad. (And so did I.)
'night!
 
Nice to meet you @Prince, hope to see you (and @Jon) around here more — I'll keep a tab open!
 
@JackDouglas Nice to meet you to!
(You can call me North, btw- prince was a joke from a culmination of two different chatrooms- it's a long story)
 
 
1 hour later…
11:19 PM
Okay, the meta-question has been posted
 

« first day (3303 days earlier)      last day (144 days later) »