Tony,

I agree that there is a room to improve Folksonomy (that's the name of this feature) and would love to get your ideas, how to integrate user classification. Btw,  I can tell from history that this feature has been added, when the four founders were struggling to make money feeding their families and paying the sole developer on the core, who was implementing it.

PS: This sounds, like I am defeating DNN Corp. all the time, but if you get a chance talking to Shaun, Charles, Joe or any of the other former Core Team members, they will tell you just the opposite, because I am as eager as you to bring DNN forward, up to the next level (and atm I am unsatisfied, as I am realizing that my SQL improvements don't have a chance to get included into the core for various reasons - and need to find a way to get around this to provide an option for a "Turbo DNN")

For the tag feature,  Folksonomy as you say, create a set of tags which, in the beginning, can be the same as the names of the subforums. Take each subforum and create a corresponding Q&A ag. Every question must have at  least one of these tags. This way you cover your bases. THEN the user can add other tags of their own. So even if the user creates a new misspelled, silly, nonsense, useless tag (because they don't know better), the required tag will come into play and will help the people who are using to search by tag. Hopefully they know what tag to search for. Also, this helps people who just want to browse in the area of their interest (one of the request tags). That's my suggestion. In meta.stackexchange.com, for example, you have to select one of the required tags like 'support' or 'discussion', although for DNN support, I consider these too broad and not helpful because any question will be considered 'support'.