When a tag has been burninated by the community (as opposed to baninated, which is an SE function), raise the amount of rep required to create the tag again.

  • 7
    And increase the required amount exponentially each time it happens. – Servy Nov 12 '13 at 20:58
  • 3
    We will Raisethebarinate all the tags! – Linuxios Nov 12 '13 at 20:58
  • 1
    @Servy - But what happens when, a few years down the road, someone invents a very popular jquery plugin named "weirdness" (or "homework")? I think there'd need to be some cap on the exponential growth to ensure that we don't have to ask Jon Skeet to add tags for us. – JDB still remembers Monica Nov 12 '13 at 21:04
  • 3
    @JDB You add an exception for mods. (Side note; homework is baninated, not burninated, and even if there was a product by that name, it would really need some other prefix; else it's just be overwhelmed with abuse, rather than legitimate taggings.) – Servy Nov 12 '13 at 21:05
  • @Servy - Seems like it'd be a little out of scope for mods, who aren't supposed to be arbiters of what is technically correct. Perhaps we can have some kind of scale - 1500 to create tags (currently implemented), 2500 to recreate a burninated tag (in line with tag synonyms privelege), 10k to recreate a re-burninated tag (moderation privelege), 20k to recreate a re-re-burninated tag. And the buck stops with 20k. If a tag is still a problem after 20k, it can be banned. – JDB still remembers Monica Nov 12 '13 at 21:09
  • 5
    @JDB When dealing with tags that are constantly being created/burninated, more than just a few times, mods probably should be involved, as there's a good chance something is seriously wrong and moderator intervention would help resolve it. It should most certainly be a small enough number of cases that the workload wouldn't be too overwhelming. – Servy Nov 12 '13 at 21:12
  • (The above suggestion could also be implemented in phases, based no actual problems. Implement phase 1 - 2500 recreate privelege - and wait to see if the problem dies. If not, implement phase 2, etc.) – JDB still remembers Monica Nov 12 '13 at 21:12
  • @Servy - Tag creation and maintenance is explicitly a community moderation activity. Unless the tag is blantantly off-topic, it should not require moderator intervention. If Jon Skeet or Hans Passant (choosing obvious examples, here) wants to create a new tag to ask a question about a cutting edge api named "weirdness", they shouldn't need to first post a question on Meta asking that the tag be reinstated. Just my opinion. – JDB still remembers Monica Nov 12 '13 at 21:27
  • 4
    @JDB For them to be unable to do so, they'd have had to create the tag and then have it be burninated, in addition to it having been created an burninated many time (where many could depend on the specific function, but should probably be well over a dozen). If that happened, then they probably should be coming here to meta because there is a clear problem and no community consensus. Such situations should also be sufficiently rare as to not be burdensome. – Servy Nov 12 '13 at 21:30
  • @Servy - I can see the logic in that. As long as the burnination cycle was sufficiently long to only put perennially abused tags out of reach ("dozens"), I could get behind that. I think a ratchet system with a cap like I proposed would also be effective. In any case - I agree that it should be increasingly difficult to reopen burninated tags. – JDB still remembers Monica Nov 12 '13 at 21:42
  • Related - Semi-blacklist tags (put tags on hold) – Bernhard Barker Nov 12 '13 at 22:04
  • Oh gods, yes. Yes, yes, yes. Very yes. Tremendously yes. Especially with increasing rep requirements as recreation increases. I'm sick and tired of burninating the 110 repeat offenders I check every day... – Charles Nov 13 '13 at 3:23

You must log in to answer this question.