<p>Organizing tags is a delicate balancing act between being too comprehensive and too specific.  It is no surprise, then, that discussions about tags occur frequently.  I am grateful that our community is constantly thinking about them and proposing improvements.</p>

<p>Tags are primarily intended to help people find information.  Secondarily, they organize threads into related groups that are used to recognize people who are active in various specialties.</p>

<p>The proposal to synonymize <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/hypothesis-testing" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;hypothesis-testing&#39;" rel="tag">hypothesis-testing</a> with <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ab-test" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;ab-test&#39;" rel="tag">ab-test</a> runs counter to both these objectives.  It loses the semantic differentiation implied by "A/B testing."  It would seem prudent not to make one a synonym of the other.</p>

<p>Supporting this conclusion are 49 threads currently endowed with the <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ab-test" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;ab-test&#39;" rel="tag">ab-test</a> tag.  This number, which has developed organically by original posters and community members applying the tag as they see fit, is evidence that <a href="https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ab-test" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;ab-test&#39;" rel="tag">ab-test</a> is perceived to be useful.</p>
