I don't see why it's necessary to categorize people into introvert/extrovert. (Then again, I don't agree with binaries in gender or in politics, either.)

I have traits of both, and I think most people do. If I describe myself to someone who is sold on the "upsides of being an introvert" thing, they'll use the fact that I'm sometimes awkward one-on-one but totally comfortable working a room or speaking to a crowd to tell me I'm an introvert. Anyone else will use the same thing to tell me I'm an extrovert. As far as I can figure, I'm a person who is sometimes awkward one-on-one but likes public speaking and networking.

Not needed -- this can be done automatically while also presenting an incentive to use the built-in quality indicators already present in Hubski. mk has mentioned that users who are often ignored and have few quality indicators eventually hit a global ignore button. Individual posts that drive people to interact with an ignore button through a link attached to that post (whether the instance of username or tag attached to that post) should automatically go into a possibly-inappropriate queue that can be sorted by number of associated ignores.

I see why you want to avoid that, but why have the all-posts-tagged pages at all if that's the primary concern with tags? If you have all-posts-tagged pages, you have subreddits, full stop. #askhubski being a primary example. You can make them harder to get to, but that just means the people using them like subreddits will be the people willing to undergo temporary annoyance to use them like subreddits.

If you don't want tags used like subreddits, you need to do more with them than just allow following and add them to an all-posts-tagged page. That's a subreddit. You're just calling it "following" rather than "subscribing" and making it harder to get to the subreddit.

Why not replace "all posts tagged" entirely with some sort of discovery mechanism based on post context? Let's say I click #science, and I get a page populated with recent and all time popular (the latter should go away once I've seen them) #science posts, but also with posts that are tagged with keywords known to be related to #science, like #NASA or #biology, and with posts by the top posters who use the #science tag. That's actually functionally different from a subreddit and would begin to address the challenge of enabling discovery on Hubski. Just a rough off the cuff thought, but if you don't want subreddits, you can't just build pages that function exactly the same way and make them harder to get to.

"Jock idiot" sounds like a stereotype primarily aimed at males, while "cunt" is a vulgar term for the female anatomy. Can you explain why "cunt" is the appropriate pejorative, here? Does your view of the definition of "cunt" differ from its colloquial meaning, which I've always interpreted to be, "Someone who is the very worst possible sort of woman?"

Remember when socially conscious movies were made to STOP wars, not to encourage more guns and glory to assassinate a single (admittedly incredibly evil) individual? This just reeks of military fetishism and the mentality that life is an action movie where there'll be no meaningful collateral damage no matter how many bombs you drop trying to get one guy. Obama got Bin Laden, and he wants Kony, he's sent troops after Kony, and I bet you that $10 back that he'll get Kony before 2016 if he is reelected. I believe he'd have done so without this "Kony 2012" thing, and I think the filmmakers will come out of this having enriched themselves and acquired fame at the expense of Africans who do not receive charitable dollars that donors (not you, but others) think are going to children in Uganda.