On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 08:47, Michael Barnathan wrote:
Edits != Trustworthiness. Edits don't even
accurately represent how
active a contributor you are, as you can see from any long standing
revert war, someone with thousands of edits but only 1 or 2% of them new
articles, or even an article like Peerage, which has some 200 (valid)
edits by the same user). Edits just represent how many times you type
some text in and click a button, and I think basing adminship, a symbol
of the community's trust in a user, solely or even automatically on how
many times you click that button is absurd. It would help to lessen sock
puppetry, though I don't agree that it will eliminate it. I think that
monitoring the quality of edits would help eliminate sock puppetry more
effectively; not too many people will wait months while making valid
contributions to the encyclopedia on a sock puppet and keeping their
original account active at the same time.
Agreed. And aside from that, I've rarely seen some sort of automatic
mechanism for advancement that was at all successful for any reason.
There will always be people who will try to abuse the system. On forums,