After some considerable time surfing the halfbakery, I've noticed that certain M-F-D labels get thrown at ideas almost reflexively. I believe that in many cases, this is due not to a problem with the idea, as an "idea." Assuming for a moment that these are in fact halfbakery-worthy ideas, I believe
that there may be a problem, either with the existence of certain halfbakery categories, or with the way a few M-F-D- labels are explained.
I suggest that we first scrutinize the halfbakery M-F-D categories to be sure that this is not the source of any problem. I believe, that if there is a problem here, it could be found in the WIBNI, WTCTTIS, Advocacy, let's all, or magic labels.
Let us take the WIBNI label.
Standing for "Wouldn't it be nice if..." many new posters are accused of posting WIBNI ideas. Often their idea is every bit as well-thought out as any other idea on here, but runs afoul of the idea because the new poster voices an idea by saying "I can never get X when I want it. Wouldn't it be nice if I had an invention that does X." After this, it appears that some hardened halfbakers instantly MFD the idea as WIBNI, despite the fact that the text of the idea then reads "So we do Y, and Z to a W, then add a Q at this point to make a working device for achieving X."
The WIBNI category also has the following statement "Ideas that already occur in existing science fiction usually belong here." While it is true that many science fiction ideas would easily fall into the category of WIBNI, it is also true that some science fiction ideas (such as "gene therapy" and "Communicators") have in the past become reality, at least to some limited degree, after sufficient tinkering.
While the halfbakery may not be the place for a lot of hot and heavy Sci-Fi tinkering, I believe that the help file mentions something about ideas being best if they are possible. I also believe that the WIBNI label's main intention is summed up in the statement "widely known as desirable, but unobtainable without giving any new clues as to how it could be done."
I suggest that while WIBNI has served us well in the past, it may do better with some modification, into a different tag, with a name such as "Impossible." Such a category could be merged in with the existing "Bad Science."
Alternately, the WIBNI label, if it's spirit is intended to avoid endless Sci-Fi references, could be merged with the two WTCTTIS... categories, to form a more massive tag, known as MFD-Sci-Fi. (For things that are widely known to be popular Science Fiction concepts but which are not explained in the idea in a way that could help make them a reality.) If this course was taken, the wording would need to be very careful, because Science fiction is the breeding ground for some very useful ideas, but without good science to make them possible, they are simply bad science.
Now shall we consider the WTCTTIS... labels. Not to say that these are inappropriate labels, but their long string of letters, and general redundancy with the Magic, or WIBNI categories suggest to me that they are not in fact useful for much. Perhaps I am wrong. After all, a rule that never gets broken may in fact be a very good rule, and I am glad the halfbakery is not the home of countlessly reinventing light sabers and teleporters.
What about the Magic category? Well, an idea that relies on Magic is not really an invention, and not really much fun to read unless it has a powerful humorous aspect to it. However, I feel that sometimes a tighter definition of "technology they know very little about as magic" may be in order.
In particular, I feel Magic is sometimes overused with regards to ideas involving modifying existing life forms. Anyone who's watched a little NOVA knows that pigeons can be selectively bred. One can select the two birds in each generation who have the most feathers on their feet, for example, and get birds who could serve as featherdusters just by walking around your apartment. Likewise, anyone who's seen the Simpsons knows that a little radiation increase the chance of mutation, and could generate interesting new traits in a species. The chance of something in particular occuring is astronomical, but these two concepts are no more out of the scope of a layman than incorporating Custard, or a Sterling engine into an idea must require the poster to have a PHD in chemistry or physics.
Being that I am no expert in genetics, I feel inadequate to specify just how the MFD magic label might be reworded, but I believe that some rewording might give moderators more free time to do whatever they enjoy doing when they are not checking spurrious MFD tags. I believe no halfbakery category should be the unique domain of subject-matter experts. Thus, I assume that a MFD label which attacks anyone simply because they are not an expert is spurrious, unless their idea is also patently impossible, boring as hell, or contains science so bad that any layman would see it as foolish.
I single out for particular study two MFD labels that are commonly used for ideas of particular categories: These are the MFD of Advocacy, and let's all. These MFD labels apparently are intended, among other things. to stop rants and flame wars based on political grounds before they begin.
I've noticed that the Advocacy and Let's all labels tend to be dropped quite heavily, and with confusing abandon on almost any ideas that involve legislation, laws, education, insurance, or government.... of course, the nature of legislation, laws, education, insurance, or government normally dictates that something is advocated, or encouraged for larger groups of people.
MFD Advocacy, and Let's all labels may crop up in such areas as Business: Crime, Business: False claims, Business: insurance, Business: scam, Business: smuggling, Business: training, Culture: calendar, Culture: celebration, Culture: news, Culture: public holiday, Culture: revival, Culture: television, Culture: tourist attraction, Fashion, Halfbakery, Other, and almost every subcategory of Public.
Now I'm not one for fine distinctions, but such categories as Public: education, Public: government, Public: law, and Public: politics tend to be well-nigh mired in charges of advocacy, and let's all. I believe that the Advocacy, and Let's all labels can be easily leveled at many ideas in these areas. Indeed, I would be hard pressed to think of any idea involving a change to the government, politics, law, or education that could not be charged with Advocacy, Let's all, or both. To make a valid contribution in some of these categories, one would almost have to run afoul of both MFD labels. Whether re-writing the Adovacy, or Let's All labels in any way can fix this issue is uncertain to me. Perhaps some halfbakery MFD labels are unsuitable for appendation to certain categories of ideas... If so, it may be worthwhile to specifically discuss this fact, and implace MFD moratoriums as appropriate for these categories.
This of course leads me to the next possibility: That the Halfbakery contains some categories to which any idea would actually be against the spirit of the halfbakery. That is, any "idea" posted under a certain category may automatically earn an MFD tag as soon as it is read. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it is somewhat puzzling. Perhaps the internet simply has no good home for such ideas, and the halfbakery, in it's compassion, decided to take in these strays. Perhaps as the site has changed, some popular categories are no longer acceptable. Perhaps it's simply a matter of knowing when to break the rules, and when not to. I suspect that the life of the moderators might be more reasonable if idea categories that imply ideas which would run afoul of M-F-D labels simply did not exist. Searching out such categories would be a somewhat difficult task, I suppose, but might be rewarding in the end.