Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Post History
I've been thinking about abilities again lately (and for a while), because they're too hard to earn but just tweaking the Wilson numbers won't fix it. The fundamental problem is that a single nega...
Answer
#2: Post edited
by
Monica Cellio
·
2024-10-15T19:43:52Z (about 1 month ago)
clarified from comments
- I've been thinking about abilities again lately (and for a while), because they're too hard to earn but *just* tweaking the Wilson numbers won't fix it. The fundamental problem is that a single negative event sticks to you forever and requires many *more* positive events to compensate. I sometimes look at active users, wondering "why doesn't this person have such-and-such ability yet?", and the answer is one declined flag two years ago or something like that, despite dozens of accepted ones since.
- What problems would arise if abilities, instead of using Wilson scores, were formulated as:
- - At least N positive events within timeframe T1
- - And no more than M negative events within timeframe T2
- The events would be the same as what we use now: posts, suggested edits, flags. Maybe those should be changed too, but I'd like to see if we can *just* adjust how we count the things we already have for the abilities we already have and if that would make things run more smoothly for our communities.
- I originally wrote this as a single timeframe, but I think for some things we'll want to consider the positive record for longer than the negative record. Maybe the timeframes will end up being the same in some cases. If we're going to do this at all, having two values rather than one doesn't seem too complicated.
- I've been thinking about abilities again lately (and for a while), because they're too hard to earn but *just* tweaking the Wilson numbers won't fix it. The fundamental problem is that a single negative event sticks to you forever and requires many *more* positive events to compensate. I sometimes look at active users, wondering "why doesn't this person have such-and-such ability yet?", and the answer is one declined flag two years ago or something like that, despite dozens of accepted ones since.
- What problems would arise if abilities, instead of using Wilson scores, were formulated as:
- - At least N positive events within timeframe T1
- - And no more than M negative events within timeframe T2
- The events would be the same as what we use now: posts, suggested edits, flags. Maybe those should be changed too, but I'd like to see if we can *just* adjust how we count the things we already have for the abilities we already have and if that would make things run more smoothly for our communities.
- I originally wrote this as a single timeframe, but I think for some things we'll want to consider the positive record for longer than the negative record. Maybe the timeframes will end up being the same in some cases. If we're going to do this at all, having two values rather than one doesn't seem too complicated.
- I'm thinking this as the logic for *granting* an ability, not logic for doing ongoing assessment to grant or *revoke*. Currently, abilities are not auto-revoked if you do something that would have caused you to no longer qualify. Moderators can suspend or revoke abilities if needed.
#1: Initial revision
by
Monica Cellio
·
2024-10-15T17:33:23Z (about 1 month ago)
I've been thinking about abilities again lately (and for a while), because they're too hard to earn but *just* tweaking the Wilson numbers won't fix it. The fundamental problem is that a single negative event sticks to you forever and requires many *more* positive events to compensate. I sometimes look at active users, wondering "why doesn't this person have such-and-such ability yet?", and the answer is one declined flag two years ago or something like that, despite dozens of accepted ones since. What problems would arise if abilities, instead of using Wilson scores, were formulated as: - At least N positive events within timeframe T1 - And no more than M negative events within timeframe T2 The events would be the same as what we use now: posts, suggested edits, flags. Maybe those should be changed too, but I'd like to see if we can *just* adjust how we count the things we already have for the abilities we already have and if that would make things run more smoothly for our communities. I originally wrote this as a single timeframe, but I think for some things we'll want to consider the positive record for longer than the negative record. Maybe the timeframes will end up being the same in some cases. If we're going to do this at all, having two values rather than one doesn't seem too complicated.