This is what I guess I don't understand, because what you're saying lines up with why I think console-based platforms should be included. That said, I'm not a game dev (or the guy who envisioned this site in the first place) so maybe at a dev or your level it makes more sense. I guess a best an "other" platform would be beneficial to have as a way for devs to explicitly state "this is not a program designed to run natively on the traditional modern platforms"? Not sure. I guess things have worked okay the way they are now, though.
[Edit] In replying to somebody else, I think I was able to properly put it into words:
if I made a Windows game designed to look like MacOS, could I platform that under Mac because Mac users could run it in a virtual machine on their OS and play that way? The platforms make sense until you consider that the tags are set up in a way that my (albeit stupid) example is absolutely being used right now. "This Windows game looks like an NES game so we'll tag it with NES". IMO the structure should be Platform (the program is designed to work in this environment) -> Tags (the program has these traits).
and also the inconsistency of tags - such as having "NES ROM" and also "NES (Nintendo Entertainment System)" and how we have "Genesis" and "Mega Drive" as separate categories, but nothing explicitly stating "This tag is meant for ROMs"
Thanks again for your time, Leafo - I don't expect another reply back, but I hope my comment helped explain where I was coming from.