I think the best idea is to keep this as an outside system and to encourage
people to come up with alternative metrics. An API that would allow people
to come up with different ranking systems (try to quantify best prose, best
copyediting, most interesting, etc..) would be great. The model of the
project that you've outlined sounds like a great start.
On 3/18/06, Ray King <raymondking(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On gaming: No matter what we do, the system will be gameable, but if the
rewards for doing so aren't too high (which in this case I don't think
they
are) and we monitor the system, we can likely stay ahead of the
gamers. In
the end, giving people the ability to quickly and easily see what other
contributions an author has made gives the reader the chance to decide how
credible the author is.
On deletions: The idea that deleting is also a valuable contribution is a
very good point. But that does open a gaming hole in that one can add
with
one account and delete with the other. I suggest we leave that alone for
now.
On getting this going: I completely agree that we should define a narrow
and
do-able set of requirements for "Phase I". To that end, I would greatly
appreciate any help in separating Phase I, II and III features as well as
any other thoughts and help in developing specs.
Thanks for the thoughts! - Ray.
On 3/18/06, Geoffrey Burling <llywrch(a)agora.rdrop.com> wrote:
On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Hi,
> Well it's certainly very interesting. I wonder how it can be gamed,
> and what the consequences that would be for Wikipedia? I also note
> that deletions don't seem to be covered anywhere. An author who
> deletes text could be making a valuable contribution...
>
> Steve
>
> On 3/17/06, Geoff Burling <llywrch(a)rdrop.com> wrote:
>> Have a look at Ray King's essay:
>>
>>
http://www.pint2.org/index.php/Contributor_Ranking_System
>>
>> Although this solution is aimed more generally at sites using
Wikimedia
>
software, this is something I believe Ray has been talking with Jimbo
> about. I happened to be present when Ray presented this the other
night,
> & a known expert suggested an excellent
way to grab some of the data
> needed without causing a strain on the servers.
>
> And Ray is *very* interested in feedback. I hope he concentrates on a
> simplified version of this proposal, rather than trying to write the
> finished, with all of the bells-&-whistles version.
>
I know that the possibility of "gaming" this tool has been raised --
but
if
we make the assumption that what Ray's Toolbar measures is based on the
version currently viewed, then the fact someone contributed "fnord" 100
times (which was quickly deleted) is factored out.
As for negative deletions -- I think that should be handled in version
2.0
(where I expect the cross-Wiki feature will be
implimented). What do you
think, Ray?
Geoff
--
Raymond King
ray(a)aboutus.com
503.888.8808 (cell)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l