802 Messages
•
15.4K Points
Protection of Top Contributors Data
Many sites that rely on public contributions have systems where users have rankings to say what data they can edit that already exist on their sites.
So would it not be possible for the top most reliable contributors on IMDb to have some sort of status where their contributions cannot be altered by other users at all unless they provide concrete evidence that the data is wrong or needs a correction.
Obviously people given a status could have it rescinded if they proved to be unreliable and inaccurate to be below standards.
The thing is, the 100 or so people doing the most contributing on IMDb are probably the ones having their work vandalized or falsely altered more than anyone. Speaking for myself, it can be weekly, I can translate several episodes a week (cast/crew/companies) word for word to IMDb, mark it complete and then come back a week later to find things altered or deleted for no reason, I can't be the only one this happens to. Not only is it exhausting to keep correcting it back, it takes away time from doing new contributions, and staff time to deal with many unnecessary contributions flooding in and complaints about vandalism.
Regular users can still submit whatever they want, they just can't without evidence junk a top contributors efforts which seems very easy to do as things stand.
It's just a rough idea that needs polish but I think'd it'd just make the site so much better in the long run. Upvote if you agree and feel free to discuss.
bderoes
Champion
•
5K Messages
•
118.3K Points
3 years ago
Not just the top 100, but any contributor with a high reliability rating.
I wonder if having your contribution altered by others impacts _your_ reliability rating.
1
clematt1000
272 Messages
•
3.2K Points
3 years ago
Thats an good idea
0
keyword_expert
2.7K Messages
•
47K Points
3 years ago
On the surface this sounds like a good idea, but I would probably oppose it in the specific case of keywords.
Many of the top contributors (myself included) achieved their top status primarily through the submission of keywords, which are extremely easy to submit in large quantities. Unfortunately, a few of these top contributors have heavily favored quantity over quality, and the results have been messy, to say the least. Although these folks may have top-contributor status, many of their submissions are not top quality. Here are a couple threads discussing some examples.
inappropriate plot keywords
What's up with all the highly specific keywords?
How to Know If Your New Keyword Might be a Bad Keyword
Given the high volume of keywords submitted and because there is very little quality control by staff in vetting keyword submissions, it can literally take months to unravel and fix some of these top contributors' messes. If deletion or modification of their keywords were curtailed, it would make the process not worth anyone's time.
Perhaps one compromise I might be able to live with (regarding keywords specifically) would be if top contributors' submissions could only be edited by other top contributors. But even that compromise might not give you the protections you likely desire, especially if your submissions are being edited or deleted by other top contributors.
0
0