On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 01:44 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
The only thing you seem to be missing is that you can always revert to not requiring hashtags.
Bruce has raised a point that is entirely valid and one with which I agree.
?
You have mandated the use of hashtags; what is the intended purpose of every message being labelled with one or more tags? Given that your original post included
In reality we ended up with more than 300 hashtags, many of them not particularly meaningful and only used once.??
I would go as far as to suggest that the mandate has not achieved, and now cannot achieve, what it was intended to achieve. IMHO 300 hashtags is well in excess of any practical limit of usability; members are simply not going to scroll through a list that long to see if there is a hashtag that matches the subject of their post and will thus just type something into a new hashtag (which if they are lucky will match an existing one) which simply adds to an already over - long list. Your many of them not particularly meaningful and only used once is a clear manifestation of that.
?
The problem can all too easily be compounded (and may have been already) by a member typing a new hashtag which differs from an existing one by just one typo; oh look...? new hashtag with a spelling mistake.?
?
Once upon a time the beta group allowed members to create hashtags, and the list was more or less infinitely long. It included at least FOUR variants of "hashtag"; apart from the "original" it had hashtags, hash tag and hash tags? and may have had hahstag (or some such typo) as well; some time has passed since the group owner finally put a stop to allowing member creativity and my recall is not perfect! That group still requires a mandatory hashtag chosen from a fixed picklist of eight tags; much more manageable.
?
So... a question, hinted at above. What is the purpose of your hashtag mandate, and is that purpose being achieved?
?
Chris?
