The questions tagged under such tags attract very less views and/or get very few/no answers. Is this desirable?

Is it because very few users have the background knowledge about those topics or is it because these topics are found uninteresting by the community? Or is there some other reason for this behaviour?

I understand that the number of questions asked under such tags are less but should that be a reason for less activity in the questions asked under such tags?

  • $\begingroup$ It seems like your question answers itself. The topics are less popular, so there are less people interested in them. This means fewer questions, but also fewer people looking at those tags at all, hence less activity on the questions. $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 14:32
  • $\begingroup$ What do you mean by less popularity? Less questions asked or less expert specialization in these topics? And why do fewer questions imply fewer people looking at those tags? I don't think that fewer questions in a topic should disinterest the users from being interested in it (in fact I think it should be the reverse, topics in which questions are rarely asked should intrigue people more). $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 17:19
  • $\begingroup$ There is an older post: Best and worst tags for % answered rate. Looking at the numbers there, it seems that there are tags where much lower percentage of the questions gets answered than in the case of natural-deduction and propositional-calculus. $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 18:33
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It doesn't help that a fair number of people suck at ensuring their question is properly tagged. $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 19:33

I answer many logic questions, but I do not have every logic-related tag on my list. I would recommend using the "logic" tag on any question that is actually about logic, while also using other tags to help categorize it. If a question only has the "natural deduction" tag, for example, it may easily slip through the cracks. So the "logic" tag here is analogous to the "lo.logic" tag on MathOverflow.

The other issue with tags such as "natural deduction" in particular is that questions in that tag tend to be written in a less helpful way. This question at least lists the rules that can be used, unlike this question which is very poorly composed.

I have to be in the right mindset to want to dig into someone else's specific set of deduction rules, particularly when, as in these two questions, it seems I may just be doing their homework for them. Neither of the questions really shows the asker engaging with the material. Compare this question in which the asker is much more clearly engaged with the mathematics.

If askers want to get more and higher quality answers on questions about natural deduction or other deductive systems, the questions themselves should be of the highest quality possible, to entice experts into writing answers more frequently.


EDIT: As the OP pointed out in a comment, I have misunderstood the question. It seems that the question is not why some tags have less activity/attention, it is supposed to be "more about the mathematical topics associated with these tags."

I will leave the answer here, perhaps it is still marginally related to the question and it contains at least some useful information.

Certainly there are some areas which do not have enough experts or users able to answer questions from those areas. But your question seems to be more about tags and how they influence visibility of the question.

It is good to add specific tags, but if the question falls also under some larger tag, adding that tag as well might slightly improve number of views.

To stick with your examples, let us have a look at . I am not an expert on that area, but I'd guess that if a question is about , it will quite often fall under tag as well, And perhaps in some cases also and might fit.

For any tag you can find out the number of followers of that tag. You can find more details here, but simply said, those are the users who have this tag among favorites or subscribe to email subscription for that tag. Anyway, this number indicates users who are more likely to see questions in that tag and correlates with number of users interested in that tag.

(One disadvantage of the tags and is that many people use them incorrectly and add those tag to basically any question which is somehow related to proofs. So your question might get lost among questions using those tags incorrectly.)

Adding a tag which has more followers slightly improves the chances that your questions will be seen. (Of course, you should only add such tag if it is a suitable tag for your question - not simply in an effort to gain more exposure.)

  • $\begingroup$ So is it safe to assume that the number of experts(or users with background knowledge) in the community in these areas are less? $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 17:21
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure what your comment means. (Which areas? Less than what?) And I am getting impression that I have answered different question than what you wanted to ask? (I thought that you are asking about tags rather than about areas of mathematics.) $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 17:28
  • $\begingroup$ The areas which have less "followers" for that matter. And less than the number of experts(or users with background knowledge) in the more popular areas like for example algebra-precalculus, real-analysis, probability. And yes, my question was more about the mathematical topics associated with these tags. $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 17:47
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Well, there are followers for tags. I would not call something like (natural-deduction) or (induction) or (wieners-tauberian-theorem) an area of mathematics. (These are all examples of tabs which currently exist on the site.) $\endgroup$ Jan 14 '17 at 17:51

You must log in to answer this question.

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