[mb-users] More Quality AND More Quantity

[Tarragon M. Allen]

On Thursday 26 August 2004 03:09, Daniel Bumke wrote:
> I believe that both these points can be adequately addressed with an
> appropriately designed editing system. I have attempted to outline such
> a system (http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/wiki.pl?QualityAndQuantity). I've
> also got it as a word document with a table, but sadly the wiki doesn't
> seem to like tables... Anyway, this is not meant to be a perfect
> solution, nor is it a complete proposal (it was, after all, written in
> one afternoon). There are undoubtedly many flaws within this proposal,
> and I am sure that not all of you will agree with it.

I think this proposal is a very good one.

Some thoughts I have on it:

1) User instigated locking should be voted on. Essentially what someone is 
saying is "I think this data is correct and any changes to it should be put 
up for a vote". If enough people agree (that the data is correct), then it 
gets locked. There would be little cause for data to be unlocked in this 
situation.

2) Locking of data should take place automatically if a certain number of 
changes has been made to the data within a short amount of time. This would 
mean that if there is a dispute between two editors the data will be locked 
and further changes will need to be voted on. There may be some cause to 
unlock data that's been locked in this way, say if the data has been changed 
5 times by the same editor because he keeps making typos, or the editors in a 
dispute resolve their differences. Perhaps data that is automatically locked 
in this way can be flagged for auto-unlocking after a certain period of 
quiet.

3) Should data be able to lock itself under other conditions? For example, if 
the data has been entered, modified twice, and never touched again for 6 
months would it be safe to automatically lock it?

t
-- 
http://moto-coda.org/public.gpg.key