Not saying I disagree with you, but with that in mind and looking at the test example, I'd say that the more useful concept isn't the ability to rate editors - which I could do without, it's a little too anti-AGF imho - but its usefulness as a metric of how many people have edited a particular section. That would give every sentence some measure of "Wiki-ness," how much it had been edited mercilessly. I for one take dislike seeing masses of paragraphs written by one or two people and would be far more likely to comb through and copyedit or look for things within that section, no matter who wrote it, than one with 10 or 20 editors contributing. That's the part that would be worthwhile.
~A
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 14:46, FT2 ft2.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Very wary of what people will assume it means, and that we're clear it is a tool that needs considerable experienced interpretation and is *misleading *without it.
FT2