[mb-users] More Quality AND More Quantity

[Joe Emenaker]

Daniel Bumke wrote:

>Joe Emenaker wrote:
>  
>
>>Well, now you're approaching my suggestion that the various operations require varying numbers of votes in order to pass. For example, deletion of an artist would require a high number of votes, while *merging* that artist would require fewer, and merely changing their sortname would require fewer still.... etc.
>>    
>>
>Yeah, I guess fine-tuning the voting threshhold for all those edits not
>affected by the proposal would be a good idea. That way the voting
>backlog would be even smaller, and the more important edits would get
>most of the attention....
>  
>
I look at it this way. At present, the number of votes required for a 
mod to get immediately approved is always 5, right? With your suggestion 
of locked/open entries, you're essentially proposing an alternative 
number, 0, for some items.

So, it caused me to wonder... why can't we have 1,2,3, and 4 open to us 
as well? It seems that some of the dissent toward your idea stems from 
the notion of "throwing open the gates" to allow completely unrestricted 
edits. My stance is that there *could* be a middle ground.

Take a look at the MB mod page. It looks like 90% or more of the mods 
are (relatively innocuous) "Add Album" and "Edit Track Name" mods. If 
the number of votes required to pass these was decreased from 5 to, say, 
2, then the total number of voting needed to be done would be cut by half.

- Joe

-- 
When freedom gives way to tyranny, it is not because tyranny comes
dressed as a wolf. Rather, it comes dressed as a shepherd,
pointing out other wolves. Go *read* the Patriot Act.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3198 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-users/attachments/20040826/96cefb22/smime.bin