Jump to content

Talk:Consumerium Process: Difference between revisions

formatting + proposals + questions + not linking from the headers to point out that discussion of division of functionalitie to different wikis should be discussed here
(moved from article for discussion here)
(formatting + proposals + questions + not linking from the headers to point out that discussion of division of functionalitie to different wikis should be discussed here)
Line 5: Line 5:
Vaguely, the idea so far is:
Vaguely, the idea so far is:


1. 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==


2. 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 editedWhile 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 theseOne 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)


3. 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.
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!
: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!
9,854

edits

We use only those cookies necessary for the functioning of the website.