Fine. Right now, though, any given submission has four variables (title, URL, text and tag) and two ways to subscribe to something (user and tag). Like it or not, tags are a big part of the way content gets distributed. Frankly, I'd rather have no tags than bad tags. Right now, Hubski has bad tags. You'd be better off using any of the tag-clouding plugins, have them parse the titles of my posts for statistically-significant nouns, then present those clouds in some sort of flower gallery for users to browse. Tags as they are currently implemented are either so vague as to be useless or so specific as to be commentary rather than categorization. If you're going to have two dimensions of affinity, those dimensions need to be equally useful. You have a very firm idea as to what "following users" is, and it shows. You seem to have more nebulous ideas about what tags aren't and it also shows. If "tags" are something that you don't want to support, drop them and spend your efforts on something you believe in. Because as it is now, "tags" are nigh onto meaningless.