That's the plan. Neil, this is a concern we've taken into account; we'll be testing whether (for example) the presence of the feedback page adds 2,000 comments, but kills half of our anonymous edits, or whatever. If the harm outweighs the benefits, we'll go back to the drawing board.
On 9 February 2012 10:38, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 9 February 2012 09:04, <n...@thebabbages.com> wrote: > > > I guess my concern is that it may encourage readers to type in > suggestions and take it no further rather than take the next step and begin > editing themselves. > > > At present, the average reader doesn't even fix typos. > > > > Definitely important to watch for any changes in the rate of new editors > contributing. It also implicitly makes it "someone else's problem" to fix > things compared to our current stock response of "if you see things that > could be better, fix it yourself. " I'm not saying this is intended but it > runs the risk of making projects look they have people exercising editorial > control. > > > If it's getting any increased reader participation in any way at all, > that's a big improvement over the present. Let's see how it works out. > (With numbers.) > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Oliver Keyes Community Liaison, Product Development Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
