# Split up the overly broad Privacy category **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/split-up-the-overly-broad-privacy-category/20507 **Category:** Meta **Tags:** discourse **Created:** 2024-08-31T19:54:03Z **Posts:** 10 **Showing post:** 10 of 10 ## Post 10 by @olanography — 2025-01-15T08:35:00Z I think we should first clarify and define what a category should be, and then what a tag should be. A category should inform us about the _underlying structure_ of the post (or _how it’s presented_) to see where it should be categorized. We can differentiate this from tags, which should inform us about the _content_ of the forum post, meaning what the post is _about_ (as opposed to what _kind_ of post it is (i.e., what category it is in). If we focus solely on what forum posts is _about_ and use this as the definition of “category”, then we run into the issue of forum posts being in _multiple categories_, which should _not_ be the case for categories (firstly because Discourse does not allow for a topic to be in multiple categories, but secondly because it is just a good rule for knowledge organization). This is why _tags_ should be used for the _content_ of the forum post. A post can be _about_ privacy _and_ security, but its category may only be of one kind: discussion. This does not mean that there can be no subcategories that can inherit categories. Possible category rework: - **Bulletin Board** → (the actual term does not matter and is up for change, but the abstraction still remains; this is where the Privacy Guides team posts their written/video content, forum announcements, and other official _thingamabobs_ that come _from them_) - **Articles** → (articles published on Privacy Guides [here](https://www.privacyguides.org/articles/)) - **Videos** → (the new videos being created by Privacy Guides, as seen [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/c/announcements/videos/9407) - **Announcements** → (any forum posts categorized only at the top-level category (seen [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/c/announcements/5/none)), meaning they are neither an article nor a video yet still exist within the Announcements category) - **Changelog** → (stuff seen [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/c/site-development/changelog/9)) - **Site Suggestions** → (remains somewhat unchanged other than the fact that the **Changelog** is now a subcategory of **Bulletin Board** and that the term “site development” is changed to “site suggestions” to reflect what the posts are actually _doing_ (which is _suggesting_ changes to the website) - **Tool Suggestions** - **Guide Suggestions** - **Discussions** → (this is where actual discussions happen, which currently exists mostly [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/c/privacy/4); we should differentiate this from **Questions** by stipulating that “discussions” are about _constructing knowledge_ (like through debate or whatever) \*\*\*for the sake of the community or \*\*\*) - **Questions** → (this would be somewhat akin to “tech support” but instead, it is “privacy support” so to speak; it is vital to police this category more than most because discussion posts often start off and are disguised as questions; to differentiate them from **Discussions** , questions should be thought of _not_ as constructing knowledge, like through rational argumentation, but first and foremost as _providing already-existing knowledge_ _ **to the OP** _ like tech support forums) - **Reposts** / **Multiposts** → (the name is up for debate… but things that go here are the various news articles, blogs, videos, etc., that people share; the title should ideally be the original title of whatever is being shared (this makes others repost less of the same thing); ideally, nothing should be provided except the link to the actual news article/blog/video/etc. and maybe a couple of alternative ways of viewing the work (like through frontends for YouTube, or an archived version of the article); if the OP wants to provide their own opinion or reaction about it, they should reply to themselves instead of writing it in the original post, otherwise it might look like anyone else who responds to the original post would be responding to whatever the OP wrote, which may not always be the case since others may be responding to the actual linked work instead (which is usually the case); bad example [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/notesnook-ceo-interview-with-ente/20025), okay example [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/opt-out-interview-with-andy-yen-of-proton-about-proton-wallet/19783); good example [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/simplex-chat-evolving-content-moderation/23952); it’s also just good practice to separate what one is linking from their reactions/criticisms of it (when I reply to the bad example post, am I replying to the OP’s reaction or the post itself?); is the post’s priority **sharing** the article/blog/video/etc., and is their reaction to it supplemental/secondary? or do their reactions or thoughts take priority?; if the former is the case, then it remains in this category, but if the latter is the case, then clearly it goes in **Discussions** ; this is how we can differentiate between sharing things and discussing things, although maybe it can actually be a subcategory of **Discussions** , IDK) - I find no issue with **Meta** and **Off Topic** as categories, so they should remain as they are IMO (I’m thinking of grouping up **Discussions** , **Questions** , and **Re** / **Multiposts** into something like “Community” or whatever, but IDK… what do u guys think?) Possible tag rework: - I don’t think I need to provide a rework for tags. All that needs to happen is for someone (or multiple people, rather) to take a look at whatever subjects forum posts seem to be about and create a tag representing that. For example: privacy, security, anonymity, etc. An issue with this, though, is that tags themselves can also be categorical, like OPSEC being under security or whatever, which means that tags themselves might run into the same issue we had before if left unchecked. - This article [here](https://karl-voit.at/2022/01/29/How-to-Use-Tags/) is a decent source for understanding how to _usefully_ create tags. These articles [here](https://karl-voit.at/2017/04/18/classification/) and [here](https://karl-voit.at/2020/01/25/avoid-complex-folder-hierarchies/), written by that same guy, explain why “categories” (or hierarchies) aren’t good (although I still advocate for a specific kinds of categories). I haven’t actually read those articles in a while, so whatever information I’m positing here, he explicates far better. And so, whoever _does_ rework the categories and tags should read up on this IMO. --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/split-up-the-overly-broad-privacy-category/20507)._