<p>A risk of adding package tags would be 1) overlapping nomenclature 2) frequent disagreement on tags and 3) difficulty consulting relevant questions from other tagged questions with answers. For instance, a user working with the <code>survey</code> package would probably often mistakenly use the <code>survey</code> tag instead of the <code>survey-package</code> tag. If a user tags their question with <code>ggplot2</code> but the source of their problem was a data formatting issue, then should the <code>ggplot2</code> tag be removed, even if the subtlety in data formatting was unique to that package? It could also greatly inflate the number of tags, leading to an overly granular approach to browsing questions (such as packages with overlapping functionality like <code>lme4</code> and <code>nlme</code> or <code>gee</code>, <code>geese</code>, and <code>sandwich</code> for computing robust standard errors).</p>

<p>I think R packages come and go and there are way too many of them. I also think many expert statisticians can quickly look up documentation on a few package specific questions and quickly address the users questions without even downloading that package.</p>

<p>I think questions of type C which are methodological in nature but rely upon R to convey the idea and are tagged as such are in serious need of quality improvement. It seems that currently, expert users migrate these posts to stackoverflow where they often languish and die. I think experts should be more assertive in editing such posts to remove code/unformatted output that can be explained in concepts or algebra.</p>
