RE: STANDARDIZED REFERENCES. — WITH REVIEWS AND PREVIEWS. ... [ Word count: 5.550 ~ 23 PAGES | Revised: 2018.7.22 ]
I like the "Bethesda" model of talking about projects.
Consider posts that look like projects as purely academic, like papers. Until a project is declared.
The best way is not to declare any expectations.
Imagine a company. They declare a future product.
Expectations set a value and this is discounted. The shares of the company gain almost at once, and over time increase in value.
The product is released. It's excellent. But all the same company shares can drop in value. Expectations, for some reason, were higher than that.
Especially if projects are open source and most contributers move things along as time permits. Things must move fast to maintain interest. Better not to attract interest that will be lost. Interest is more easily gained than recovered.
Sure, but maintain a MVThreshold for content/awareness, then the big-bang will expand ‘exponentially’; there has to be a recommendation & ‘trending’ sections to draw attention to draw variant ‘interest niche’s’ of readers; i.e., some don’t think trending is worthwhile, so prefer ‘personal recommendations’. YouTube should be gamed for this. Purely social aggregation nets of searched phrases with hidden monetary value beneath; which is how Steemit/open source should be: e.g., earnings-per-content should be semi-concealed, views/’resteems’ (although changed) as the front-end display for viewers - ‘unfortunately’ ‘computation-heuristics’ for measuring/judgement/appraisal are worthless if (1) a group’s weltanschauung is excessively-removed so as not to know/comprehend/care about X (2) there is no way of getting the information to them (particularly 1 influencing 2).
There ‘is’ also an interpretation gap between singular people, as exists between social networks; which reflect changes in content/structure/design/ethos/pace of working etcetera. Each are moving towards a distinct telos [doesn’t have to be defined]. One information aggregation model doesn’t necessarily interfold onto another. They have their specific sign-traces. :)
A smart trending section would be best, with NPL parameters mainstream users can enter to affect the algorithms. This would prevent clumping and make it unclear where those trying to game the system would have to concentrate. Being dispersed, they would have a harder time gaming that system, and the experience would be safer and better for users. Less conflict.
A single, determinate product shelf itself always has pure dominant strategies. These are easiest strategies to automate. It's a major issue on this chain. And hard to fix when a user base mostly self selecting into the system according to narrow interests already in place.