| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:45 |
ADmad |
hehe.. dont get too trigger happy :P |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:45 |
alkemann |
moved a few from the "pending" to "deleted" today ;) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:45 |
ADmad |
ACTION claps |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
alkemann |
ADmad: also im a moderator of current bakery now |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
jperras |
started with a few yesterday |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
alkemann |
so this moderation tool is a concept motivated by the wish to increase quality |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
ADmad |
*hear |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
ADmad |
nice to year |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:44 |
jperras |
fyi, I'm going on a retro-active bakery 1.0 article purge. all those unworthy will be given the chance to improve their codez, or will be unpublished. |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:43 |
alkemann |
yes |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:43 |
ADmad |
err the earlier statement isnt well formed but i think you get the idea |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:42 |
ADmad |
so the lowering of bar is taken care of |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:42 |
ADmad |
the reason articles of unacceptable quality is a single moderation approves which wont be the case in 2.0... so even if say you hold very high standards and vote 2 for it others might vote 4 and its published :) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:40 |
alkemann |
it can tie in to the social aspekt of community owned article nicely |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:39 |
alkemann |
yes, but this added feature is a result of the wishes of .. well having a lower bar than what you and I might want for authors contribution, but also making an effort to increase quality |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:38 |
ADmad |
*so if it |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:38 |
ADmad |
plus we already have a system of an article getting particular amounts of votes to get published... so i it isnt good enough i wouldnt vote for it any way |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:37 |
alkemann |
i agree, but.. |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:37 |
ADmad |
ok.. personally i would prefer a article to be improved to an acceptable level and then simply published.. many times the avg. reader isnt smart enough to properly interpret the markers.. |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:35 |
alkemann |
thats a use case. lets say an article has valuable ideas, but the author hasnt expressed them well or implemented it good. it could be published as inspiration to others, but marked properly so people doesnt take it as canon |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:33 |
ADmad |
alkemann: so a not so nice article is published but with markers for users to see |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:32 |
ADmad |
hmmm |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:32 |
alkemann |
with broader uses and implications |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:32 |
alkemann |
well. look at it as a tool for moderators to comment on what an author needs to improve on |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:30 |
ADmad |
ok got it but dont understand how exactly it relates to moderation |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:29 |
alkemann |
i mean that u can tag an article as deprecated, but using the word marker instead of tag since we have a concept for tags |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:28 |
ADmad |
then can you please clarify what are "markers" ? |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:28 |
alkemann |
ok.. "no" |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:28 |
ADmad |
i am confused.. isnt there a yes/no answer to my question :) |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:27 |
alkemann |
i mean tags, but not to be confused with Tags |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 09:26 |
ADmad |
alkemann: " a set of "markers" .." you mean content pages describing best practices and so on ? |
| # |
Mar 12th 2009, 07:19 |
alkemann |
http://thechaw.com/bakery/wiki/spec/articles/moderation |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:17 |
AD7six |
well, at least I didn't say anything I wouldn't have said to him in person |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:16 |
ADmad |
hmm.. me thinks d1rk is the same Dirk |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:11 |
AD7six |
why would you modify your db for a one-off form process |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:10 |
AD7six |
I dislike the "what a wrong approach, bad idea, noise [because I have some weird design ideas]" sentiment |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:09 |
ADmad |
he seems to be a security freak.. same way ionas was suggesting passing of the fieldList param to be made compulsary |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:08 |
ADmad |
heh |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:08 |
AD7six |
they're all from dirk with a bee in his bonnet |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:07 |
jperras |
wow, how can there be so many comments on such a simple thing |
| # |
Mar 11th 2009, 11:06 |
_nate_ |
ACTION is looking... |