I have noticed some interesting trends (and the potential for more) emerging here on Oort-Cloud.org. Here is a brief rundown.
First, there is the use of various "fiction" tags, regarding which a "nonfiction" tag would be equally useful.
Second, I have seen someone post something that is a discussion item with a title that begins "Discussion: " and the tag "discussion". Similarly, one might post a review with a title of "Review: " and the tag "review", or "Fiction: " and "fiction".
This a useful idea for a number of reasons:
Personally I find tags very useful, so I am very serious about choosing them. In fact, I think of tags as emergent in the sense that, given enough people tagging, the output can be bigger than the input.
Given the above, I don't want to tell you how to tag. You know more about your posts than I do after all. And, in general, more tags are better. But I do think there are a few standard tags which would make it easier to locate and group specific kinds of posts.
The SFWA (Science Fiction Writers of America) has a great resource page of articles on writing, focused on writing Science Fiction. These articles are well categorized and range from advice to beginners to suggestions on restarting a once-great career.
I highly recommend that everyone commenting here on Oort-Cloud read the articles on Critiquing, at a minimum. This stuff is pure gold!
I just wanted to share a few thoughts on what I try and do when making comments about somebody's work. I have a few rules that I follow in terms of how I express my criticism- and I've noticed that (so far) people have been great at both giving and taking criticism (remarkable- my wife was shocked to see some of the comments exchanged). I don't always follow these rules myself, but they're the general formula I try to stick to.