Hello,
Just in case some other wikipedias are interested, too: In the german wikipedia we started an experimental web of trust yesterday. It works by the "what links here functionality". A user who wants to participate creates a page [[User:Name/trust]] and lists there all the people he trusts in the form [[User:Otheruser/trust]]. By visiting a trust page (existing or not) and clicking on "what links here" you can see which people are trusting this user.
A description in german can be found at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vertrauensnetz An example page is at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Elian/Vertrauen
greetings, elian PS: english wikipedia has a page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Trust_network with another proposal.
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Just in case some other wikipedias are interested, too: In the german wikipedia we started an experimental web of trust yesterday. It works by the "what links here functionality". A user who wants to participate creates a page [[User:Name/trust]] and lists there all the people he trusts in the form [[User:Otheruser/trust]]. By visiting a trust page (existing or not) and clicking on "what links here" you can see which people are trusting this user.
This is asking for trouble. Although you state that "even if you're not on this list, that doesn't mean people find you untrustworthy", people are inevitably going to feel that way. I think this gives the community of experienced users too powerful a tool to make newbies feel unwelcome and have them leave. (I suppose this isn't as much of a problem on the German Wikipedia because you already do that on a regular basis.)
To counteract this, a lot of newbies would be encouraged to flood other people's User talk pages with requests to be added to their trust list. I can already foresee the annoyance of it.
Lastly, there's also the lot of us who don't really care much about the other contributors and just go their own way. They wouldn't want to create a trust page because they wouldn't know whom to trust and whom to mistrust, but they would be thought of as anti-social jerks who don't trust anybody if they don't.
Timwi
Kaixo!
On Sat, Jul 24, 2004 at 02:33:25PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
wants to participate creates a page [[User:Name/trust]] and lists there all the people he trusts in the form [[User:Otheruser/trust]]. By
This is asking for trouble. Although you state that "even if you're not on this list, that doesn't mean people find you untrustworthy", people
Well, it depends what it is used for.
Myself i think such a feature is indeed needed; simply the last changes list is growing too large; and we can hide only three kind of contributions (robots, minors and oneself changes); it would be a good thing if each registered used could build his own list of other users that he doesn't need to appear on last changes; or conversly, a list of those that should be highlited (like the "watchlist" but not based on articles but on users to watch).
--- Elisabeth Bauer elian@djini.de wrote:
Just in case some other wikipedias are interested, too: In the german wikipedia we started an experimental web of trust yesterday. It works by the "what links here functionality". A user who wants to participate creates a page [[User:Name/trust]] and lists there all the people he trusts in the form [[User:Otheruser/trust]]. By visiting a trust page (existing or not) and clicking on "what links here" you can see which people are trusting this user.
Not sure if having this public will be useful. My idea all along was to have this as part of the software not unlike the watchlist function.
Then edits by people you trust (and perhaps people you trust by proxy) would be in small, grayed out text on your watchlist and in Recent Changes.
That way your attention is drawn away from edits that you would almost certainly find to be OK.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Trust_network
-- mav
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
On 07/24/04 20:20, Daniel Mayer wrote:
Not sure if having this public will be useful. My idea all along was to have this as part of the software not unlike the watchlist function. Then edits by people you trust (and perhaps people you trust by proxy) would be in small, grayed out text on your watchlist and in Recent Changes. That way your attention is drawn away from edits that you would almost certainly find to be OK.
Absolutely. Something that only affects *your* view of Wikipedia and that those on the list cannot see.
We *must not* reimplement high school popularity games on Wikipedia.
- d.
David Gerard wrote:
On 07/24/04 20:20, Daniel Mayer wrote:
Not sure if having this public will be useful. My idea all along was to have this as part of the software not unlike the watchlist function. Then edits by people you trust (and perhaps people you trust by proxy) would be in small, grayed out text on your watchlist and in Recent Changes. That way your attention is drawn away from edits that you would almost certainly find to be OK.
Absolutely. Something that only affects *your* view of Wikipedia and that those on the list cannot see.
that was the origin of the discussion. But as the feature request queue is long, we decided to experiment with the tools we have. It would be wonderful, however, to see such a system implemented.
We *must not* reimplement high school popularity games on Wikipedia.
At the moment I don't have the impression the system develops into a game of such kind. Sure, there are questions like "why I am not on your list", but people are dealing with this problem in different, responsible ways. Many added a personal note taking all the blame on their shoulders for having forgotten someone, or offer to answer that question frankly on their talk page etc. Personally, I've some people on my list with whom I have serious personal problems, but however trust them as responsible wikipedians.
For the problem of newbies which Timwi brought up: I think that can be handled the same way the community greets newbies - we can encourage people to add newbies to their trustlist after good contributions and it can be turned into a tool to make feel people welcome rather than excluded from a circle of "oldies": "Oh, someone added me to his trustlist" - the first step of an admin candidature?.
Everything depends on the use the community makes of it - in itself the system is neither good nor bad. And despite of all hazzles and little quarrels, I have some trust in the wikipedia community ;-)
greetings, elian
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
For the problem of newbies which Timwi brought up: I think that can be handled the same way the community greets newbies - we can encourage people to add newbies to their trustlist after good contributions and it can be turned into a tool to make feel people welcome rather than excluded from a circle of "oldies": "Oh, someone added me to his trustlist" - the first step of an admin candidature?.
Of course I'm aware that the feature could be used that way, and that attempts can be made to encourage the community to follow this kind of standard. However, in practice I firmly believe that people won't do that.
Things aren't objective, you know. From the point of view of the community, many inexperienced users are vandals at first, or the socially not-so-competent appear like mentally disturbed people or something of the sort. The experienced users won't hesitate to try to get rid of them, under the belief that it's in the interest of the community.
The more tools there are to enable this sort of behaviour, the more the community of a particular Wikipedia (or other Wikimedia project) will turn into a static group of permanent insiders who welcome very few newbies.
Timwi
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org