[mb-users] Brainztorming: rank edits, not users

[Philip Jägenstedt]

We would all like users to vote more, but what are the incentives for
looking at track listings of artists you don't even know existed,
really? I do it sometimes out of duty or as relaxation when I don't
want to think too hard (really). But for most people, what rewards are
there?

Perhaps one solution in a hypthetical ranking system would be to give
higher rank to users who have voted a lot (where they also voted
"correct"). But the connection between voting and editing only goes
that far -- voting yes on 1000 wikipedia links shows dedication but
you can still be oblivious of CapitalizationStandardEnglish.

More inline voting would be nice too, for example by putting "hot"
votes on the front page (which is very dull compared to the wonders
inside at the moment).

Still, getting people to vote more is mostly a social undertaking
while a edit ranking system is a mostly technical one. In other words,
there's no reason why the edit queue can't be attacked on 2 fronts
simultaneously.

Philip

On 4/30/08, Jim DeLaHunt <from.nabble at jdlh.com> wrote:
>
>  Philip:
>
>  Brainstorming!  I like it!
>
>
>
>  Philip Jägenstedt-3 wrote:
>  >
>  > Objective: find those edits most in need of checking (separate noise
>  > and signal in the edit queue)
>  >
>  > I'm thinking that instead of ranking users and changing the voting
>  > periods, we could rank each edit individually based on a numer of
>
> > factors....
>  >
>
>  I think this would be a good way of focussing attention on those edits that
>  would most benefit from the attention.  And I agree, once we set up the
>  mechanism, we could add and remove ranking factors to tweak its behaviour.
>
>  This presumes a situation where we have a scarcity of voter attention and
>  edits are not getting votes. Instead of working to do better in that
>  situation, another alternative is to work to change the situation. That is,
>  spend equivalent effort to get more voter attention, or remove barriers.
>  Anyone have ideas for that?  Would that be a more productive direction?
>
>  Note also that there are other goals than finding edits most in need of
>  checking.  I would be pleased if MB gave faster gratification to
>  good-quality contributions.  That's not quite the same thing.
>
>  -----
>      -- http://jdlh.com/ Jim DeLaHunt , Vancouver, Canada  •
>  http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/JimDeLaHunt
>
>
>  --
>  View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Brainztorming%3A-rank-edits%2C-not-users-tp16985590s2885p16988693.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