After reading this post, something occurred to me; the OP misspelled a tag and inadvertantly created a new one. That tag is https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/burnination-request. Now, I understand the system will kill that tag tomorrow if it's not used anywhere else, but still...

It suddenly became obvious to me that the Taxonomist badge is ridiculously easily "gamed". The badge currently states:

Created a tag used by 50 questions

Wouldn't the badge be better suited (and less easily achieved) if it stated:

Created a tag used by 50 users
  • 2
    That is a real tag. It's not a joke tag. It's just a typo, thats all. Sep 12, 2013 at 20:20
  • It's showing me there are now 0 questions with that tag. But, either way, my point is still valid about changing the qualification. Sep 12, 2013 at 20:21
  • Look at the question again, Ben corrected the spelling; it's burninate-request. Sep 12, 2013 at 20:21
  • 2
    And there are people monitoring new tags; if anyone is gaming the system and adding a new useless tag to 50 questions, they'll be dealt with. Sep 12, 2013 at 20:22
  • Charles is about tonight :-). And I've just been through all the new tags as well. Not much to see here :-). Sep 12, 2013 at 20:25
  • Did you just call me GOOFY? Sexy tree man?
    – user1228
    Sep 12, 2013 at 20:37
  • @Won't - I edited the question, didn't realize it was a misspelling. I'd never call you goofy. Maybe pluto, but not goofy. Sep 12, 2013 at 20:38
  • I monitor new tags here on Meta very frequently. I tend to catch them quickly, long before they reach the 50 mark. I'm sure there are other users who do the same across other sites. Most bad tags don't make it to 50 before they get destroyed or brought up on Meta.
    – animuson StaffMod
    Sep 13, 2013 at 2:58
  • -1 because I disagree that it should be changed. 50 questions is very reasonable limit, and user can post maximum of 6 question per day - I can only wish luck to anyone trying to game that badge. BTW if you wonder how I suddenly got here, blame some mysterious anonymous user. ;) Oct 16, 2013 at 19:42

1 Answer 1


You're right.

He spelt it incorrectly. It should have been not ; I've fixed it now.

You must log in to answer this question.

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