Any chance we can get a ~space group?

As other people in this thread have already said, it's not just about whether there's enough traffic to justify creating a new group, it's also about providing some visibility for certain topics.

I definitely agree, but I would say my biggest thought is whether there will be an appropriate amount of engagement in a ~space group. Will there be enough people interested in the topic that would make posts there

With that in mind, I'm going to suggest a ~socialscience group, to pick up all these posts currently sitting in ~science.

We've got a crowd who's very into the "hard" sciences, but not so much into the "soft" sciences. I want to make the social sciences more prominent here so that people considering signing up to Tildes can see that Tildes doesn't just cater to the STEM crowd. As one of the five academic disciplines, I feel social science deserves more presence here on Tildes. And that has nothing to do with its current level of traffic, but with the level of traffic I'm hoping we can generate by making this discipline more visible.

I think that one of the things that stands out to me in the dataset is how infrequently tags are used and how differently they are used person to person. For your example specifically, I know I have posted a handful of tags with psychology but haven't added socialscience.psychology. But another thing that I notice as well is that you can often find tags across multiple groups as the OP of this post noted above.

Overall it would seem better to me to instead rely on tag-driven group creation instead of high level buckets for posts. I believe I read somewhere that one day we will be able to subscribe to tags instead of groups and I view this as a better solution as I could theoretically make a post and have it show up in two high level groups, instead of needing it to be in one. I think if we had some minimum tagging rules or more people participated in adding tags to post (maybe extend the privilege of tagging to people automatically after they have contributed a minimum amount of posts), we would have enough data to automate some of the tagging through a classification system. For your example, socialsciences.psychology could theoretically built out if you were using a decision-tree based classifier where every split would add a tag. So some of my posts would get socialsciences.psychology.iopsychology or a post like the one listed by the OP could end up science.space.nasa while also being visible with tech.space.spaceflight. The tag filtering system would need to be worked so that it could identify tags at any point of the hierarchy.

I don't know, thats just something thats been rattling in my head as I have seen tags used and posts moved between groups. I don't necessarily want to be subscribed to all groups but if a post overlaps with tags that are frequently found in my other subscriptions, I would still probably like to see it. Part of the reason why I am pulling this data is to see if a classification system could be built with the data thats available from user input or if we are missing certain dimensions to make one possible. Of course, going back to my first point, I don't know if a system like this would drive engagement more vs. posts having higher visibility in new main groups.