Jag – Hi all, Quality always wins, We are going to see that through various forms. Be cool
kalleS – MBP Lee asks :
“But who is to judge that a writer has not exceeded the bounds or propriety?”
google can decide about knol because they are the owner of knol .
spiros can decide about this board because he is the owner .
he decided to make patrickL a co-owner . now they can decide together .
if they cannot reach an agreement then again spiros can decide .
so, the good news are that we can try to become a co-owner .
with respect to knol our aim shoud be to become a co-owner too .
kalleS – my Q1 is 21 .
star-ranking : better : [ -2 | -1 | +1 | +2 ] or [ — | – | + | ++ ] or [ | | | ] or [ ?? | ? |! | !! ] or ..
peterB – Good luck with your new project Spiros.
Is there any chance of putting the date display in “05-Dec” form to include all those on the planet that use a different date order? You speak of quality, but it seems that quality is subjective concept for us all. In some regards this is true, but I would like to know if there were some objective metrics that we could all agree on to help us define and recognise what quality authorship is on Knol. Some authors have suggested that “total pageviews” is the best metric for identifying quality authorship while others have suggested that the “pageviews per knol” for an author’s entire body of work is a better one. Patrick Lahaye takes this concept further in his Knol, by only looking at last weeks data when calculating this metric. I tend to agree with Patrick. Any thoughts?
kalleS – if i look on my desktop clock, there is the format 2009-12-05 .
i think this is understandable all across the planet .
btw. on the comments it is Dec 5 .
“pageviews per knol” : i agree .murry – PVpK/week
is proposed as a reference standard for quality. A new Knol detailing the simple calculation is under construction. Anyone can quickly determine their personal score from publicly visible data on their author page. For example, Spiros score is 74. Peter is 200.I’m calling the score Q1. It’s explained in a short Google Doc.
Another reference standard will be needed to signify ungamed star ranking. Between the two standards, my personal opinion is that we will have achieved a fair, balanced and universal way to not only visualize quality, but to set an incentive for writers.
kalleS – the potential of google-knol is virtually limitless .
today we have only a heap of knols .
thats similiar to the situation on a bulletin board where we have a heap of postings .
but now we have two bulletin board knols .
what do you think of making knol discussion bulletin board part of collection A ?
so we can show that the two knols are part of a greater unity .
(indeed this is a good example because the two boards must agree to it)
garryj – Spiros,
I applaud what you are trying to do here. Don’t worry if it takes time to build. As those strange ghostly voices said to Kevin Costner in Field of Dreams ‘If You Build It They Will Come’.
Warm wishes, Garry J
skakos – Thanks Garry! Maybe we cannot have quality imposed on Knol. But we can have a quality discussion about that quality goal…
skakos – Hello! This is the Knol Bulletin Board. Could we make a fresh start? Does quality has a place in Google Knol or have we lost the game already?