Difference between revisions of "Team Fortress Wiki:Discussion/Wiki Cap"
(Just a lil something something) |
m (derp) |
||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
'''A reminder of some now-established points''': | '''A reminder of some now-established points''': | ||
* ''Using a list and a scoring system is broken, leads to unproductively competitive behavior from users, and to over-reliance on it from staff'' | * ''Using a list and a scoring system is broken, leads to unproductively competitive behavior from users, and to over-reliance on it from staff'' | ||
− | * ''While distribution on a weekly basis seemed like a good idea to regulate the number of total Wiki Caps in existence, it had the side-effect of the community having the | + | * ''While distribution on a weekly basis seemed like a good idea to regulate the number of total Wiki Caps in existence, it had the side-effect of the community having the false expectation for it to happen without fail every week, and proved to be too slow at times, causing frustration'' |
* ''The English and Russian parts of the Wiki being complete, there has been an issue of people creating work for themselves in order to get more edits'' | * ''The English and Russian parts of the Wiki being complete, there has been an issue of people creating work for themselves in order to get more edits'' | ||
* ''The combination of these things turned the Wiki Cap into a standalone reason to edit, rather than a reward for doing so'' | * ''The combination of these things turned the Wiki Cap into a standalone reason to edit, rather than a reward for doing so'' | ||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
* ''Using a list and a scoring system is broken, leads to unproductively competitive behavior from users, and to over-reliance on it from staff'' | * ''Using a list and a scoring system is broken, leads to unproductively competitive behavior from users, and to over-reliance on it from staff'' | ||
** {{c|Done}}: Delete the Wiki Cap candidates list, and stop using the Wiki Cap scoring script entirely | ** {{c|Done}}: Delete the Wiki Cap candidates list, and stop using the Wiki Cap scoring script entirely | ||
− | * ''While distribution on a weekly basis seemed like a good idea to regulate the number of total Wiki Caps in existence, it had the side-effect of the community having the | + | * ''While distribution on a weekly basis seemed like a good idea to regulate the number of total Wiki Caps in existence, it had the side-effect of the community having the false expectation for it to happen without fail every week, and proved to be too slow at times, causing frustration'' |
** {{c|Done}}: Dispel the notion that drops will happen every week; we did that by not giving anything on June 26th | ** {{c|Done}}: Dispel the notion that drops will happen every week; we did that by not giving anything on June 26th | ||
** The frequency to give it may be irregular now. However, getting everyone together in order to decide on distribution requires a generally-agreed-upon moment when people are there, which may vary over time in order to keep it irregular | ** The frequency to give it may be irregular now. However, getting everyone together in order to decide on distribution requires a generally-agreed-upon moment when people are there, which may vary over time in order to keep it irregular |
Revision as of 18:46, 3 July 2011
Bringing back this to life, we need to decide how to proceed on Wiki Cap distribution in the future.
A reminder of some now-established points:
- Using a list and a scoring system is broken, leads to unproductively competitive behavior from users, and to over-reliance on it from staff
- While distribution on a weekly basis seemed like a good idea to regulate the number of total Wiki Caps in existence, it had the side-effect of the community having the false expectation for it to happen without fail every week, and proved to be too slow at times, causing frustration
- The English and Russian parts of the Wiki being complete, there has been an issue of people creating work for themselves in order to get more edits
- The combination of these things turned the Wiki Cap into a standalone reason to edit, rather than a reward for doing so
- The Wiki Cap guidelines need to be rewritten
Here are some solutions that have come up in order to address those issues:
- Using a list and a scoring system is broken, leads to unproductively competitive behavior from users, and to over-reliance on it from staff
- Done: Delete the Wiki Cap candidates list, and stop using the Wiki Cap scoring script entirely
- While distribution on a weekly basis seemed like a good idea to regulate the number of total Wiki Caps in existence, it had the side-effect of the community having the false expectation for it to happen without fail every week, and proved to be too slow at times, causing frustration
- Done: Dispel the notion that drops will happen every week; we did that by not giving anything on June 26th
- The frequency to give it may be irregular now. However, getting everyone together in order to decide on distribution requires a generally-agreed-upon moment when people are there, which may vary over time in order to keep it irregular
- Volume/rarity concerns should be disregarded; even if all editors with over 500 edits or so got a Wiki Cap, it would still be considered a rare item
- The English and Russian parts of the Wiki being complete, there has been an issue of people creating work for themselves in order to get more edits
- Done The deletion of the list should help this, as edit count matters less now, and is less visible
- The combination of these things turned the Wiki Cap into a standalone reason to edit, rather than a reward for doing so
- This needs to be more emphasized into the Wiki Cap guidelines
- Rewarding users based on other things than editing (e.g. outstanding community contribution, à la Shugo (item icons), Michael (highlander team), or Benjamoose (promo material, graphics, general awesomeness))
- This should make the "bias towards IRC members" more widely accepted, since IRC is a great way to get involved in more community-related matters other than pure editing. However, it should never be completely mandatory to use it
- The Wiki Cap guidelines need to be rewritten
- This can only be done when all of the above is settled
The method most people were leaning towards as of the last discussion was to do it on a nominate-and-approve basis:
- Staff members (or maybe regular contributions?) can nominate people and explain the reasons behind the nomination
- The rest of the staff reviews the nomination and approves, or declines, explaining their decision in case of a "no".
Multiple questions arise:
- When and where does this discussion happen?
- Can regular contributors see it?
- If yes, can they also nominate others?
- Does an approval require unanimity? Does it require a threshold of "yes"'s? Does a nomination expire if nobody says anything?
Last point: Robin said, in the email in which he talked about wiki cap distribution, that we may run any changes past by him. This is such a change, so his opinion should be taken into account before making any decision final. — Wind 11:43, 3 July 2011 (PDT)