Requested feature overview description.
Basically, in addition to the malicious/abuse reasons listed in the report post page, one more is added that reads "Tag Ruling". The intended use of this is to request an admin to make a judgement call on whether a tag is correct or not, instead of using a more severe report reason that may be invalid.

Why would it be useful?
First and foremost, using this report function is an anonymous way to voice a concern over the tags on a post. This helps prevent user-to-user arguments over what tag is right, and if an admin acts then it will also preemptively stop a possible "tag war" between users and users.
Secondly, this is a helpful way to cite an admin's decision on a post. Since only staff members can lock tags, you can often find unspoken tag locks; this circumvents messaging the admin or looking through comments for their reasoning (in no particular order). Mind you, the admin or a witnessing viewer would have to link it somewhere, so this is of lesser value.
Finally, this combats directly the aforementioned "using a more severe report reason that may be invalid". This is a reason explicitly for the questioning of whether a tag is correct or not, not a accusation that a user is abusing the tags in some fashion. Even I'm willing to admit that I've requested help with the report post function, often when no admin is on and messaging one will be more burden than benefit. I'd ask for help anyhow, but this is a more formal way to do it.

What part(s) of the site page(s) are affected?
Posts; Report Post menu; Tickets.

I just use the tagging abuse reason, because it's preventing tagging abuse in the form of a war.

Furrin_Gok said:
I just use the tagging abuse reason, because it's preventing tagging abuse in the form of a war.

Recently, Notme has requested a user to *not* use that reason for requests. Ergo, my request.

Siral_Exan said:
Recently, Notme has requested a user to *not* use that reason for requests. Ergo, my request.

I requested to curb those tag ruling requests because they were spamming the tickets. Making a new report reason just perpetuates the problem as is.
If there's no tag war going on and something appears to just be a innocuous mistake then just change the tag without a ticket.

NotMeNotYou said:
I requested to curb those tag ruling requests because they were spamming the tickets. Making a new report reason just perpetuates the problem as is.
If there's no tag war going on and something appears to just be a innocuous mistake then just change the tag without a ticket.

That doesn't prevent tag wars, that's brushing aside the problem hoping it doesn't happen. It's proactive to report the post because we can't stop tag wars, and tag changes to invalid ones do happen under even the most vigilant anonymous user's nose.

I argue that it is better to preemptively stop a problem than to allow it to happen and then stop it. There is not enough active helpful users to participate with fixing tags, staff included, and it is easier to prevent the problem from happening. Since there is only one type of user that can take preventative measures, why should we not have a way to contact them explicitly for preventing a problem from occurring?

I think we can circumvent the spamming of tickets, however, by limiting the amount of tickets a user can make and remain active. Something so simple as 5 active tickets can stop spam somewhat, but feel free to raise or lower that depending on how often you feel this comes along.

Tickets are for actual problems, not really for potential problem prevention. What you're doing is to just push work around to other people. People changing valid tags isn't the same as people just placing an incorrect one by accident or laziness.

NotMeNotYou said:
Tickets are for actual problems, not really for potential problem prevention. What you're doing is to just push work around to other people. People changing valid tags isn't the same as people just placing an incorrect one by accident or laziness.

Then why do we have that function? Why bother reporting a post when there is a user behind the problem? Seriously, give me a benefit from reporting the post where the mistake is located over reporting the user who made the mistake. A user that starts a problem, which required to be fixed on a post, is worse than the post's problem being fixed before the user makes it a problem. The user is often intentionally doing that, whereas an accident is of less severity.

And why should any user fix a tag when the ultimate goal becomes "start a tag war so the tag(s) are locked"? Even the most virtuous user would realize that they're instigating a problem after a couple of fixes that get undone. It is easy to covertly start these problems, nobody has to include a reason (anywhere) why they edited a tag and since the decision is not final yet, anyone could question whether they're right or wrong and can decide to "fix it themselves", looping back to "try to start a tag war so the tag gets locked". Hell, I've witnessed the tickets that result in the requester being wrong, your listed method could result in their punishment when they could have instead asked whether the tags were right or wrong.

Letting a tag war occur only results in a problem that an individual user can't fix without being a staff or without a report. The result I suggest is the same as the result you suggest: a report must be made eventually.

Your entire point revolves solely around the assumption that something does become a problem. Most often that doesn't happen.
The report reason was made so that a post can be reported when reporting a single user wouldn't make sense, for example when multiple people change the tags back and forth. Just because someone sets a wrong tag for once doesn't mean it's immediately a problem that needs a record. Fix it, leave a short comment, move on. If they come back and change it again, or if they just flat out state they'll ignore the advice then it's a problem.
If someone starts a tag war by removing a valid tag (or at least a tag you assume is right), then that is a reportable offense.
Placing obviously wrong tags is a reportable offense.

If you absolutely can't tell whether or not something requires one tag or another, in those fringe cases feel free to make a ticket. But for anything that's rather clear we really don't need to go around locking everything.

Well, thank you for discussing this with me. While I still want to disagree on some points, I honestly have to take your experiences as fact since I've been here for a shorter period of time...

But I have one last question, going around the "if not this, then that" logic: if we are to not report posts with the intention to get the tags judged and locked, then how should we go about asking such a question? I, for instance, rarely trust my own judgement, would it be better if I brought this up to chat whenever I want to ask for an additional judge to help me?

Siral_Exan said:
Well, thank you for discussing this with me.

Hope you don't mind me pointing something out and it might just be totally off key or unnecessary, but as a user who focuses on tags that tend to start tag wars... or least I used to before my health collapsed... And who has gotten into a lot of shit for trying to hold up the sites rules, and doing it wrong thus stepping on toes...

I learned that you change the tags, and move on... maybe come back again (I made a personal set of sets that I add images too that have caused trouble) to check on it. If the image already has an argument or a war escalating I report the offenders an move to your next image. If the person covertly starts a war, report them then. I learned the hard way it's better to let them fuck up, than try to preemptive a tag war and fuck up in the process.
Ratte knows I use the tickets for that reason, the admin also know I used to use them at the drop of a hat, and was told I was doing it wrong and that I was annoying people... so while adding a dispute option would have it's uses, it would also create unnecessary work and would be way way waaaaay over used.
And Heck, it worked for me. Ask them in private if your doing something they're having an issue with... believe me, I have trouble telling when something I'm doing is causing issues cuz of how my brain works so asking them shouldn't hurt.

Edit: and I've reread that four times and I might just not be making much sense. It's midnight here an I'm tired lol...

Esme_Belles said:

Hope you don't mind me pointing something out and it might just be totally off key or unnecessary, but as a user who focuses on tags that tend to start tag wars... or least I used to before my health collapsed... And who has gotten into a lot of shit for trying to hold up the sites rules, and doing it wrong thus stepping on toes...

I learned that you change the tags, and move on... maybe come back again (I made a personal set of sets that I add images too that have caused trouble) to check on it. If the image already has an argument or a war escalating I report the offenders an move to your next image. If the person covertly starts a war, report them then. I learned the hard way it's better to let them fuck up, than try to preemptive a tag war and fuck up in the process.
Ratte knows I use the tickets for that reason, the admin also know I used to use them at the drop of a hat, and was told I was doing it wrong and that I was annoying people... so while adding a dispute option would have it's uses, it would also create unnecessary work and would be way way waaaaay over used.
And Heck, it worked for me. Ask them in private if your doing something they're having an issue with... believe me, I have trouble telling when something I'm doing is causing issues cuz of how my brain works so asking them shouldn't hurt.

Trust me, I'm also buddy-buddy with a lot of the admins here, but I try to avoid relying on them. And when I do, I often make it formal; they're not my friends (arguable) or parents (obvious), they're strangers that I'm taking time away from.

I suggested this because I pay close attention to the tickets, and I believed that this could be of some help to the site. And while I want to believe that it would work, I know when to stop and reroute any further points into additional questions. I've probably survived on this site for longer than I should have by avoiding such conflicts...