Post History

I agree with the [answer of Lundin](https://electrical.codidact.com/posts/289416/289419#answer-289419) except for point 3 disambiguation.

>Regarding 3), in case a term does have several different meanings and all meanings are on-topic, then the most common/jangon use of the term takes precedence. 

Instead, I would proceed in this way:

**In case a term has several different on-topic meanings, it should never be a main tag**. New, more precise tags, should be created for all the different meanings [^1]. Then the ambiguous term should be either
(A) placed as synonym of one of those different tags, or (B) put in a blacklist as too ambiguous. The choice between A and B is a judgement call, depending on what would cause less confusion in the specific case. If case (A) is chosen, a warning should be put in the guidance text **of both tags**.

[^1]: For the very unlikely case that finding acceptable unambiguous terms for every meaning, I think that a call on Meta would be warranted and acceptable. These cases should be quite rare and so they should not be an issue.


For example, in the case of `PID`, I would create two non-ambiguous tags:

+ `PID-controller` (with a spelled out synonym `proportional-integral-derivative-controller`, as per the guidelines)

+ `process-ID (with a spelled out synonym `process-identifier`)

Then I would make `PID` a synonim of `process-ID`, just because I feel the term alone is slightly more used meaning process-ID (but that would be a judgement call. I would be OK if someone else blacklisted it).

Then in the `PID-controller` guidance text I would write: *"Do not confuse with PID as process-ID (process identifier)"*, and in `process-ID`: *"Do not confuse with PID as PID-controller"*.


The important thing is that **an ambiguous tag should never be a "main tag"**, but only possibly a synonym, so that people would have the least chance of using one meaning for another by mistake.