In the RPC Office server, we're currently discussing some changes to the hazard system and I encourage you to bring up any thoughts you have here or in the server.
Right now, we're working on refining a lot of the descriptions for hazards on the threats and hazards page so that they are more relevant to how the anomaly is a threat rather than just its properties. You can see a list of possible changes here but that likely won't be implemented until a lore team vote in awhile from now.
We're also discussing which hazards should be removed from the official hazards list, mostly for being redundant, vague or non-hazardous, and because of our inability to think of a way to edit them into something usable. Some of these hazards might just be unsalvageable. You can view the current chart for what each lore team member thinks of each hazard here, but that is likely to change a lot as we will eventually discuss and debate our positions at a lore meeting in the future.
Furthermore, we are considering a change to how we approve new hazards for the list. Currently, we just wait for people to propose them in chat and vote on whether or not they should be added. We may add a requirement that the hazard first be used in at least five articles before we consider it to be added to the official list which would ensure that we don't ever approve hazards that never get used (cough cough, visibility hazard). It's perfectly allowed for authors to use hazards in their articles that aren't in the official hazard list, so no issues there. We may create a condensed list—either on a separate page to the main hazards page or in a collapsible on the page—of hazards that meet the 5 hazard requirement but were deemed by Lore Team unfit to be put on the main list. Of course, any hazards we decide to remove from the main list would be put on that smaller list, so we would still be able to keep them around for tagging and to keep the hazard icons on the site in an official capacity.
There was also some talk of creating a new section in articles, similar to the hazard types, but for anomalous properties in general. It would be a thing on the formatting guide, or maybe a new page under the Operational Info tab on the topbar, or an added section to the threats and hazards page. I expect it would be an optional part authors can add to their articles, with a list of all the official anomalous properties and their descriptions, similar to how the hazards work. We could possibly move the hazards that aren't really hazardous but are just anomalous properties into the anomalous properties list if we do go down this route. This kind of thing has been brought up in the past and it never made it through at those times, so it doesn't have a strong chance now, but I could see it happening. Actually, me bringing it up here probably gives it enough weight to have ten times the chance of being approved, which is kind of conflicting since I'm personally not really in favor of this proposal. I definitely wouldn't want it to become a required part of the format. I'd be okay with it existing if it's optional.
Again, please share any thoughts in this thread or in the Office server.