On Thursday 24 June 2004 21:30, Timwi wrote:
As an easy example, try this: SETI Online offers online certificates for work units completed. I am coming up on certificate four - 1000 work units - and I'm excited.
This is significantly different from what I was referring to. It is already technically possible for us to count the number of contributions (I even keep an approximate value on my user page updated). However, it is clear to everyone, troll or not, that these numbers don't mean anything. Anyone can make tens of thousands of edits; the system does not judge how meaningful each edit is.
This could be solved by awarding users with, for example, most articles that made it to the main page. They are already pre-selected by humans as good articles.
And *that* is where the problem comes in. By giving awards to people, we would be *judging the value* of a contribution. And we're bound to go horribly wrong. We're going to be biased against obscure topics that nobody finds interesting; we're going to be biased towards people who have been here for longer and whom we already appreciate; and we're going to be biased against people who are not quite as socially competent as we would like them to be.
OTOH, I couldn't agree with this more.
You already mentioned that we are here for the fun of it. Yes, of course we are. Who's denying that? The problem with these awards is that each award makes *one* person happy, and a *load* of people unhappy. It is
I don't think it is so. I don't see how someone receiving an award would make me unhappy.
simply no fun to see other people receive awards for something you personally feel you have done better, more of, or to a greater degree/extent. People are inevitably going to feel that way. It is well
OTOH, this does make sense.