Make the tag "security" label useful, or remove, or at least explain it
The "security" label on the tag management page is (1) redundant and (2) misleading. (1) It is simply the lowest level (highest line on the chart right above it) that applies to any post tagged with it. (2) By being there at all, it suggests that it is useful, e.g., a settable value for "who can see this tag".
See Request #12096, under "Site Interface". I asked about the tag, and was told
"Tag security is tied to entry security. If the posts used for those tags are public, then the tags will also be public."
So, if I use a tag only for filtered posts, the page for that tag will say "Security: filtered". But the first time I use it for a public post, the "security" level will change to "public". In other words, it's exactly equal to the label on the lowest security level (highest line on the list just above it) with a non-zero count.
The screen is deceptive. Giving a "security" level for the tag strongly implies that there is a security level ASSOCIATED SPECIFICALLY with the tag, and that it can be set somehow. I've been assuming I can set security for any post independent of any other post and any other setting. This "security" field is not only useless -- totally redundant with the list above it -- but misleading as well. Either
1. make it meaningful -- e.g., by letting the user set "who can see this tag" (I may not WANT everyone to know that I've tagged a particular post as "love life", or that I have such a tag!)
2. or rename it, e.g., "lowest security level of posts with this tag", or something shorter that says the same thing, if you can think of a wording
3. or remove it entirely.
Is the meaning of this field described anywhere online? Unless you follow option 3, there should at least be a link on the "security" label to explain it.
My preference is #1. I know that would take more work than #2 (+ the info link), but that would be adding something useful.
Should be implemented as-is.
Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
Shouldn't be implemented.
(I have no opinion)
(Other: please comment)