Talk:Consumerium Process: Difference between revisions

Talk:Consumerium Process (edit)

Revision as of 11:30, 14 March 2004

441 bytes added , 14 March 2004

formatting + proposals + questions + not linking from the headers to point out that discussion of division of functionalitie to different wikis should be discussed here

Jukeboksi

Bureaucrats, developer, Administrators

9,854

edits

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Vaguely, the idea so far is:
-. Anonymous [[trolls]] dump unreliable crap data into the [[Research Wiki]] claiming it has excellent credentials and is true beyond reasonable doubt.  Actual researchers investigate these claims to the best of their ability and refine this crap into [[Consumerium:intermediate page]]s that they sign and [[edits, votes and bets|somehow stake something on so we know they believe it]].  The crap and quality must co-exist in the same wiki, this is where it gets sorted out.
+==Research Wiki==
+*Anonymous [[trolls]] dump unreliable crap data into the [[Research Wiki]] claiming it has excellent credentials and is true beyond reasonable doubt.
+*Actual researchers investigate these claims to the best of their ability and refine this crap into [[Consumerium:intermediate page]]s that they sign and [[edits, votes and bets|somehow stake something on so we know they believe it]].
+*The crap and quality must co-exist in the same wiki, this is where it gets sorted out.
+*One option besides signing, would be to use '''time not edited''', that an article is not edited by anyone to determine when it goes to the [[Signal Wiki]] but this apparently has the disadvantage that people who wish to stop some intermediate article reaching the Signal Wiki could make trivial edits to keep the time from elapsing.
-:There may or may not be [[Campaign]]s in this same wiki.  If not, then we have separate [[Opinion Wiki]]
+==Signal Wiki==
-:: IMHO [[Campaigns]] are essential to the generating the [[Consumerium buying signal]] so I think they should be in [[Signal Wiki]]. Not sure though. Any arguments against?--[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 23:31, 11 Mar 2004 (EET)
+*Signed pages are assumed correct by default.
+*But because this information is not factually reliable, and there might be serious implications of releasing it, it goes through a final stage at the [[Signal Wiki]] where the [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] makes its standard disclaimers and if necessary edits out stuff that it can't release, perhaps per country.
+*We don't say that ''anything'' is necessarily a "fact", for legal reasons, ''Note that the [[Content Wiki]] conception assumed that we could.  But, really, we can't.''
-:::Things that campaigns claim are true should be fact-checked, like any other research.  So there's an argument to require them to encounter "the other side", i.e. opposing [[faction]]s, fairly early.  Though, for a campaign to be effective, it would have to be able to propagate its own idea of its message into the [[Signal Wiki]], so, probably, it has a presence in both of these.  One can think of it as somewhat higher integrity [[advertising]], perhaps.  Besides, the [[Campaign]] is just another entity that can sign a page, so:
+==Campaigns==
-. Signed pages are assumed correct by default.  But because this information is not factually reliable, and there might be serious implications of releasing it, it goes through a final stage at the [[Signal Wiki]] where the [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] makes its standard disclaimers and if necessary edits out stuff that it can't release, perhaps per country.  We don't say that ''anything'' is necessarily a "fact", for legal reasons, ''Note that the [[Content Wiki]] conception assumed that we could.  But, really, we can't.''
+IMHO [[Campaigns]] are essential to the generating the [[Consumerium buying signal]] so I think they should be in [[Signal Wiki]]. Not sure though. Any arguments against?--[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 23:31, 11 Mar 2004 (EET)
-::The difference between [[Campaign]] and not, might be, a campaign signal must be passed or failed, and cannot be edited.  While one can edit a non-campaign signal.  Note that [[advertising]] for [[green light]] products would work on the same grounds, and we might be able to charge for those to make the whole [[healthy signal infrastructure]] [[self-funding]].  Just one of many ideas to make us less dependent on [[volunteer labour]], which always comes with biases.
+I suggest that [[Campaigns]] and [[TCE]] functionality should go to the [[Signal Wiki]] for the [[Campaign]]-functionality is briefly described as '''facts''' about some[[body]] expressing an '''opinion''' about something or '''facts''' about someones '''support''' for some '''opinion'''
+Now the strict multilevel security measures described in [[Opinion Wiki]] will have to be played down to make [[Signal Wiki]] operation more feasible. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 22:13, 11 Mar 2004 (EET)
+Things that campaigns claim are true should be fact-checked, like any other research.
+:Why? [[Campaigns]] can state whatever (as long as it's not offensive) and if it bears no resemblance to reality then the [[votes|support]] of the Campaign would be relatively low rendering it "out of sight" or the bottom of the pack. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 13:30, 14 Mar 2004 (EET)
+So there's an argument to require them to encounter "the other side", i.e. opposing [[faction]]s, fairly early.  Though, for a campaign to be effective, it would have to be able to propagate its own idea of its message into the [[Signal Wiki]], so, probably, it has a presence in both of these.  One can think of it as somewhat higher integrity [[advertising]], perhaps.
+The difference between [[Campaign]] and not, might be, a campaign signal must be passed or failed, and cannot be edited.
+:What does pass or fail mean in practice? The [[Lowest Troll]] does not understand. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 13:30, 14 Mar 2004 (EET)
-. Every problem ends up back at this [[Development Wiki]] where more [[trolls]] gnaw on it.
+While one can edit a non-campaign signal.  Note that [[advertising]] for [[green light]] products would work on the same grounds, and we might be able to charge for those to make the whole [[healthy signal infrastructure]] [[self-funding]].  Just one of many ideas to make us less dependent on [[volunteer labour]], which always comes with biases.
+==Development Wiki==
+*Every problem ends up back at this [[Development Wiki]] or [[Noise Wiki]] as it's humorically called by some where more [[trolls]] gnaw on it.
 See also [[Talk:Development Wiki]] for more on this.
-----
-This is just as I imagined it would work since you introduced "proper" descriptions and distinguishation between [[Signal Wiki]] and [[Research Wiki]]. I agree we should go on using these terms and adopt the stuff from [[Opinion Wiki]] and [[Content Wiki]] to these articles.
-I suggest that [[Campaigns]] and [[TCE]] functionality should go to the [[Signal Wiki]] for the [[Campaign]]-functionality is briefly described as '''facts''' about some[[body]] expressing an '''opinion''' about something or '''facts''' about someones '''support''' for some '''opinion'''
+==Paper Consumerium==
-Now the strict multilevel security measures described in [[Opinion Wiki]] will have to be played down to make [[Signal Wiki]] operation more feasible. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 22:13, 11 Mar 2004 (EET)
 :Also we should rethink everything about [[Signal Wiki]] to accomodate the concerns [[User:DanKeshet]] raised.  The idea of printing a book is a good one, and it's now dealt with in [[Consumerium buying signal]] directly.  It is lower tech than the [[audio]] stuff even.  And it would certainly serve for instance purposes like the [[Big Carrot]]'s, they could print the book and go through to figure out if they really had to stock a product, or if they could ditch it and there was sufficient competing substitutes (something a human has to figure out).  Remember, getting the crap off the [[retail shelf]] entirely has the biggest impact!  Anyone willing to be [[friendly retail]] might also be quite willing to vet their products this way!