On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com>wrote;wrote:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:10 AM,
Brian<Brian.Mingus(a)colorado.edu> wrote:
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Carcharoth
<carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com
wrote:
<snip>
Is it not
more likely that most long-term editors who have been active
for years have had most of their text mercilessly edited into oblivion
and have very low average "trust" levels? And more recent editors may
have higher trust levels?
With the disclaimer that I haven't read the paper since the 2006
Wikimania,
no, the algorithm is smarter than that. Simply
having your edits
overwritten
at some point in the future is not going to
detract from the period of
time
that your edit lasted. Additionally, if some but
not all of your words
persist through rewrites that would contribute to your reputation.
If you merely revert vandalism that removes a persistent piece of
text, doesn't that unfairly contribute to your reputation as the text
continues to persist and the algorithm thinks that anyone who added it
was doing so independently?
Carcharoth
Why would it matter? If you did the right thing, thats all that there is to
care
about. This is what im worried about, Wikipedia: The RPG getting even
more ingrained.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l