[mb-users] "The need for free and open music metadata", but MB not good enough

[Philip Jägenstedt]

I like this idea, although I don't know about the definition of
"reasonably truted contributor". If a single no-vote is enough to
revert an edit until voting closes, why not do this for all users? If
we could avoid adding more power levels that would be great. An
advantage of the "revert-on-no" policy could be to make it "hurt" more
for a user to see his edits get reverted, this way he may be more
inclined to provide proof (or stop making incorrect edits).

Philip

On 4/29/08, Jim DeLaHunt <from.nabble at jdlh.com> wrote:
>
>
>  Per Øyvind Øygard-2 wrote:
>  >
>  > On Tue, 29 Apr 2008 01:38:09 +0200, Jim DeLaHunt <from.nabble at jdlh.com>
>  > wrote:
>  >
>  >> It seems it would be an improvement if edits by reasonably trusted
>  >> contributers were accepted by default while the vote goes forward. If
>  >> others determine the edit to be bad, then it gets reversed.
>  >
>  > In the context of rewarding users this doesn't make a lot of sense since
>  > it's not experienced moderators/voters who need incentive, but the other
>  > way around.
>  >
>
>
> I guess I should be more clear.  By "reasonably trusted contributers" I mean
>  someone who has registered a user ID and has made a small number of
>  contributions which then got voted in.  Thus they have proven that they
>  didn't come here just to vandalise. I don't mean contributors with as high a
>  status as automod (I consider them "highly trusted contributors").
>
>  I think I am in this category of reasonably, but not highly, trusted
>  contributor. I would guess you are too.
>
>  Personally, I find the two-week delay demotivating. I do a lot of work to
>  improve an entry because I'm about to tag music files for that release, and
>  I can't easily see the results of my MB contribution in my music files. I
>  have to come back two weeks later and refresh.
>
>
>  Per Øyvind Øygard-2 wrote:
>  >
>  > You should also keep in mind that [voting delay is] a major deterrent
>
> > for vandalism. On wikipedia it's not such a big problem since you can
>  > immediately revert, but not so on MB, either you wait for an automod to
>  > come by or you risk having your albums tagged with "THIS ALBUM SUCKS!!11"
>  > as title until the vote is inevitably voted down a week later.
>  >
>
>
> We need to preserve a vandalism countermeasure, agreed. But if we were to
>  reflect changes immediately we could still have countermeasures. For
>  instance, we could say that a change by a reasonably trusted contributer is
>  applied at once but still held open for a confirmation vote, and a single No
>  vote is enough to reverse the change while the vote completes. Thus any
>  contributor could reverse the "THIS ALBUM SUCKS!!11" vandalism immediately,
>  it needn't require an automod. This would move our balance point between
>  responsiveness and security closer to responsiveness, at a cost proportional
>  to how many edits are approved with zero votes.
>
>
>  -----
>      -- http://jdlh.com/ Jim DeLaHunt , Vancouver, Canada  •
>  http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/JimDeLaHunt
>
>  --
>
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/%22The-need-for-free-and-open-music-metadata%22%2C-but-MB-not-good-enough-tp16910670s2885p16968016.html
>
> Sent from the Musicbrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list
>  MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
>  http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users