Recognition for wiki contributors could help the wiki grow
by Diego Santos Leao - GameBlox Studio · in Torque Developer Network · 11/10/2007 (11:46 pm) · 12 replies
Sometimes when I learn something, the first thing I think is "this was so hard to learn that I should post about it somewhere...". But then I think "why bother? I would get nothing for it". That thought is keeping me from writing articles on the wiki... "Why should I work for free?", I'm always in a tight schedule... If I had a lot of spare time, it would be fun, but right now I just can't do it...
My point is not that no one should write their findings on the wiki, on the contrary: GarageGames should urgently implement some "rewarding system" that would catch the interest of some developers.
My idea is that every wiki page should have something like the following layout:
http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3774/contributorslistsmallew7.png
(this is a mock up screen, I added the list of contributors on the right-upper corner bellow the title)
That would be the "top three" contributors to THAT article, so that the main "writer" of the article is recognized, and people are rewarded for making major contributions. I believe that this system (or other similar) would help the wiki to grow.
Everyone wants their skills to be known by the community (and maybe also get a job offer on a project ^^), or to advertise their company commitment to the community through adding good quality content. A rating system would be also nice, so we could have on the front page of the wiki the best pages of the week, month, etc (and most important, the main contributors of them).
PS: I know, I know that wikis are suposed to be about anonymous contributions, but I really think that my suggestion is valid for the TGB community, because as it is today, the TGB wiki is not growing... it is important to treat this as a problem, so we can address it quickly!
My point is not that no one should write their findings on the wiki, on the contrary: GarageGames should urgently implement some "rewarding system" that would catch the interest of some developers.
My idea is that every wiki page should have something like the following layout:
http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3774/contributorslistsmallew7.png
(this is a mock up screen, I added the list of contributors on the right-upper corner bellow the title)
That would be the "top three" contributors to THAT article, so that the main "writer" of the article is recognized, and people are rewarded for making major contributions. I believe that this system (or other similar) would help the wiki to grow.
Everyone wants their skills to be known by the community (and maybe also get a job offer on a project ^^), or to advertise their company commitment to the community through adding good quality content. A rating system would be also nice, so we could have on the front page of the wiki the best pages of the week, month, etc (and most important, the main contributors of them).
PS: I know, I know that wikis are suposed to be about anonymous contributions, but I really think that my suggestion is valid for the TGB community, because as it is today, the TGB wiki is not growing... it is important to treat this as a problem, so we can address it quickly!
About the author
Creative director at Gameblox Interactive, a game studio focused on downloadable games and advergames. www.gameblox.net - contact@gameblox.net.
#2
The "associate" status just says that someone have "done something good". What I suggest is the other way around: from each article, refer to the author(s), so I can reconize him from what he has done.
And I would never get the associate's tag, because I don't have the time to make so many contributions. But I do have the time to write an article or two, and I definately would write them if my name appeared as in the mock screen I posted before. I just want to write a small number of very usefull articles, and be recognized for them.
The system I propose haves the power to:
- show my level of knowledge
- promote me as a developer (or artist, etc) through my knowledge
- promote the projects I participate, because they would tend to be known as "the project were that great programmer/artist works" (and that perspective could lead people to invite me to their teams)
- advertise my future products (be they games, art packs, or watever) as my name would be familiar to the members of the community
- as the article is "glued" to my own signature, I would feel compeled to link/point other relevant wiki pages (or resources) to it, enforcing the ease of use of the wiki.
- Companies and teams could centralize their contributions to the wiki, and just add pointers to them in their personal sites. With this, they "open source" their contributions, as oposed to the "blog way" where people just comment, and never can add content or fix the article.
- Blog or forum posts are desorganized, hard to search, and can't be updated by the viewers. Not anonimous wiki pages could help solve this problems and still be a "personal content".
- Imediately rewards the contributor by showing his avatar at the header of the article (if none of the benefits I listed above materializes, at least I "carved" my signature somewhere, associated with good content and clever thinking, something I would be proud of).
- Someone could read one of my articles and if he likes it, he could list all my other articles and read them knowing that they would probably also be good.
This would occur because people would (even "unwilingly") start noticing "man, a lot of great articles were writen by that guy" (as they would constantly notice the avatar), or "that company's employees are the writers of the most usefull articles I've read... let me see what products they have done, they're probably very good...".
------
In less words, we should reconize sparse contributions as much as the continued ones, because if everyone felt compeled to write at least two articles, the wiki would certainly grow much more than with intensive sparse efforts.
11/13/2007 (9:56 pm)
Hi Stephen, what I suggest is very different from what the associates program offers, it was a poor choice of word when I said "rewarding system", what I was trying to propose was a "recognition system". A trophy is a reward, but appearing on the newspaper holding it is recognition: I prefer the recognition.The "associate" status just says that someone have "done something good". What I suggest is the other way around: from each article, refer to the author(s), so I can reconize him from what he has done.
And I would never get the associate's tag, because I don't have the time to make so many contributions. But I do have the time to write an article or two, and I definately would write them if my name appeared as in the mock screen I posted before. I just want to write a small number of very usefull articles, and be recognized for them.
The system I propose haves the power to:
- show my level of knowledge
- promote me as a developer (or artist, etc) through my knowledge
- promote the projects I participate, because they would tend to be known as "the project were that great programmer/artist works" (and that perspective could lead people to invite me to their teams)
- advertise my future products (be they games, art packs, or watever) as my name would be familiar to the members of the community
- as the article is "glued" to my own signature, I would feel compeled to link/point other relevant wiki pages (or resources) to it, enforcing the ease of use of the wiki.
- Companies and teams could centralize their contributions to the wiki, and just add pointers to them in their personal sites. With this, they "open source" their contributions, as oposed to the "blog way" where people just comment, and never can add content or fix the article.
- Blog or forum posts are desorganized, hard to search, and can't be updated by the viewers. Not anonimous wiki pages could help solve this problems and still be a "personal content".
- Imediately rewards the contributor by showing his avatar at the header of the article (if none of the benefits I listed above materializes, at least I "carved" my signature somewhere, associated with good content and clever thinking, something I would be proud of).
- Someone could read one of my articles and if he likes it, he could list all my other articles and read them knowing that they would probably also be good.
This would occur because people would (even "unwilingly") start noticing "man, a lot of great articles were writen by that guy" (as they would constantly notice the avatar), or "that company's employees are the writers of the most usefull articles I've read... let me see what products they have done, they're probably very good...".
------
In less words, we should reconize sparse contributions as much as the continued ones, because if everyone felt compeled to write at least two articles, the wiki would certainly grow much more than with intensive sparse efforts.
#3
11/13/2007 (10:25 pm)
I agree with Diego here. I think he has some very interesting ideas.
#4
11/14/2007 (7:44 am)
I agree as well, and I'm glad he continued to flesh them out to explain them further! 
#5
11/14/2007 (10:05 am)
This is a pretty cool idea. The wiki could definitely use some love. 
#6
Your idea could make a really mess of things when other people began to change your documents. You will not be the document owner for much time, and even after just a typo fix, such document will became owned by the community, and in fact is fair enough to be this way. In a wiki, is a conceptual error, think about a document as "this is my document".
And all that, without taking in count the very spirit of the wiki wich is community cooperation. I tell you this from the position of have written many TDN articles, fixes, contributions etc. The recognition is not the purpose of the participation. The contribution itself is the purpose of the participation.
As I said on other thread, an strong community will save our asses on production time sooner or later, and that -I think- should be your perspective, help you, by helping others.
On a side note, I will say that, as a core-user of TDN, many, many times, I go to the "history" link, looking for the ones who contributed to an article; so beyond the fact of recognition, if you want to, you can easily find the author of each coma of any part of the wiki.
Edit: typo
11/14/2007 (11:05 am)
I think the problem is that your proposal goes against the idea of any wiki system in the world. The whole point of wikis is the concept of information separated from an owner.Your idea could make a really mess of things when other people began to change your documents. You will not be the document owner for much time, and even after just a typo fix, such document will became owned by the community, and in fact is fair enough to be this way. In a wiki, is a conceptual error, think about a document as "this is my document".
And all that, without taking in count the very spirit of the wiki wich is community cooperation. I tell you this from the position of have written many TDN articles, fixes, contributions etc. The recognition is not the purpose of the participation. The contribution itself is the purpose of the participation.
As I said on other thread, an strong community will save our asses on production time sooner or later, and that -I think- should be your perspective, help you, by helping others.
On a side note, I will say that, as a core-user of TDN, many, many times, I go to the "history" link, looking for the ones who contributed to an article; so beyond the fact of recognition, if you want to, you can easily find the author of each coma of any part of the wiki.
Edit: typo
#7
We are taking what's being said into consideration, so I'd like to hear more perspectives for sure!
11/14/2007 (11:32 am)
There are certainly pros and cons (and Novak brings up some really good points) with any solution of this type. It's possible that just additional exposure of the Associates program as being not a reward (it's not the purpose really), but as a recognition of contributions to the community over time (as well as expertise in at least certain areas of Torque development/use) should be much more community visible.We are taking what's being said into consideration, so I'd like to hear more perspectives for sure!
#8
* You write an article on your own GG blog
* You link your article from TDN on the (new?)page of your choice as an extra reference
i.e.: "Diego Santos Leao Article on XXX"
This way, your name and profile will be always at sight (on TDN and on the article itself), the article will not be modified, and you still will somehow be collaborating to the comunity. This is less cooperative of course, but as I said is somhow intermediate- and still usefull (and uses current tools, btw)
11/16/2007 (10:16 am)
I've been thinking about this, and I got this idea, for a very simple intermediate solution:* You write an article on your own GG blog
* You link your article from TDN on the (new?)page of your choice as an extra reference
i.e.: "Diego Santos Leao Article on XXX"
This way, your name and profile will be always at sight (on TDN and on the article itself), the article will not be modified, and you still will somehow be collaborating to the comunity. This is less cooperative of course, but as I said is somhow intermediate- and still usefull (and uses current tools, btw)
#9
This Thread goes hand in hand with the "wiki a complete mess" one...
11/16/2007 (2:34 pm)
I've given plenty of help over the years[and not gotten much for it]...and I've seen those with less help output brought to a 'status' level; quite quickly...lol. Totally subjective, in my opinion[if you don't 'fit in'...har]. I put one of the first articles on the TDN...ported over the one from my own web pages...and once I did[some time involved to complete; thank you very much] I had to honestly put forth Diego's thought of 'why bother?'.....I'm basically doing someone else's work; for free. Documenting...writing a how to article...not even a thanks...."we appreciate it". It's obvious; without that little 'endGame' there of a pretty cheap 'thank you'...it's NOT appreciated at all, or just appears so.This Thread goes hand in hand with the "wiki a complete mess" one...
#10
* Its a wiki: collaborative work by definition (why such expectations/need of recognition?)
* Its clear, by helping others, we are helping ourselves here.
About the current recognition system, I agree that it must exist only under a carefully observation to not commit injustices, but again the same subjetivity that you mention, applies to yourself, maybe you just didnt enough to a system of higher standadrs.
And btw, I also think that we should read all the thread and then post something related to the current context of it, because if not, we are always placed on the first comment.
11/16/2007 (2:48 pm)
This thread could became easily a place for complaints, if we all dont change our minds, and really see some simple facts:* Its a wiki: collaborative work by definition (why such expectations/need of recognition?)
* Its clear, by helping others, we are helping ourselves here.
About the current recognition system, I agree that it must exist only under a carefully observation to not commit injustices, but again the same subjetivity that you mention, applies to yourself, maybe you just didnt enough to a system of higher standadrs.
And btw, I also think that we should read all the thread and then post something related to the current context of it, because if not, we are always placed on the first comment.
#11
I just think that, once in the wiki, it should become editable (if the author think it should be in the wiki, he is accepting this condition). Or maybe we could implement another checkbox saying "do not update my blog page with changes on the wiki".
I understand that after a while, the "owner" of the page will change, but I think that is not a problem. I would be very happy if someday I write a page and next week I notice that someone expanded it so much that he became the owner, and I was the "trigger" for it. If this becomes an issue, we could even make a smaller tag right bellow saying "originally contributed by Your Name Here".
------------
There are real problems with this aproach? Probably. The actual one is better? I don't think so. I don't think so because of the following statement:
"the user contributions to the wiki, at least for TGB, is almost zero" (and with "users" I mean TGB owners - indie or not).
If that statement is true, we got a problem. And problems exists to be solved. Just crossing our fingers waiting for the community to understand what wikis are all about wont change a thing. EDIT: and maybe wikis are more about "open sourcing" the site, so people are free to add, fix, rewrite content (anonymously or not), and not that much about strictly "anonymous contributions".
------------
I have tons of other ideas, for example:
- Adding the option to submit new wiki pages to the "What's new page". It would appear something like "New article on TGE Wiki: Synapse Gaming - Torque Lighting System".
- Implement automatic triggers on wiki pages, so that items like "Major update to the article: Synapse Gaming - Torque Lighting System" would appear on what's new.
And by that I mean that what I suggested is not the only aproach to mitigate the problem, but certainly is the one that I personaly like most.
I would like to hear from people if the system suggested on my two first posts would make them write more. And another suggestions for making the wiki more atractive.
11/16/2007 (3:57 pm)
Hi Novack, I liked your suggestion to "wikify" the GG articles (not just blogs, but resources, etc). It could be implemented as a simple checkbox at the end of the edit page, so someone could express their intention to leave that as a wiki page. I just think that, once in the wiki, it should become editable (if the author think it should be in the wiki, he is accepting this condition). Or maybe we could implement another checkbox saying "do not update my blog page with changes on the wiki".
I understand that after a while, the "owner" of the page will change, but I think that is not a problem. I would be very happy if someday I write a page and next week I notice that someone expanded it so much that he became the owner, and I was the "trigger" for it. If this becomes an issue, we could even make a smaller tag right bellow saying "originally contributed by Your Name Here".
------------
There are real problems with this aproach? Probably. The actual one is better? I don't think so. I don't think so because of the following statement:
"the user contributions to the wiki, at least for TGB, is almost zero" (and with "users" I mean TGB owners - indie or not).
If that statement is true, we got a problem. And problems exists to be solved. Just crossing our fingers waiting for the community to understand what wikis are all about wont change a thing. EDIT: and maybe wikis are more about "open sourcing" the site, so people are free to add, fix, rewrite content (anonymously or not), and not that much about strictly "anonymous contributions".
------------
I have tons of other ideas, for example:
- Adding the option to submit new wiki pages to the "What's new page". It would appear something like "New article on TGE Wiki: Synapse Gaming - Torque Lighting System".
- Implement automatic triggers on wiki pages, so that items like "Major update to the article: Synapse Gaming - Torque Lighting System" would appear on what's new.
And by that I mean that what I suggested is not the only aproach to mitigate the problem, but certainly is the one that I personaly like most.
I would like to hear from people if the system suggested on my two first posts would make them write more. And another suggestions for making the wiki more atractive.
#12
About the wikis though, you have a misconception, TDN (or wikis in general) are not about the idea of "strictly anonymous contributions", on the contrary, any contributor must be loged on, and have to take resposability for his changes, but that dont exactly means recognition; you can see Wikipedia for example: on the main article you will never see the list of contributors, but is actually there if you need it.
For the rest, I loved the ideas of recent TDN articles list on "What's new" page, and even the evolution you've made of the idea about link a blog from TDN: "wikify this blog" sounds pretty cool.
11/16/2007 (6:59 pm)
Diego, I feel nearest to your ideas. Is changing from a closed idea to a construction. Also I agree about encouraging participation in general.About the wikis though, you have a misconception, TDN (or wikis in general) are not about the idea of "strictly anonymous contributions", on the contrary, any contributor must be loged on, and have to take resposability for his changes, but that dont exactly means recognition; you can see Wikipedia for example: on the main article you will never see the list of contributors, but is actually there if you need it.
For the rest, I loved the ideas of recent TDN articles list on "What's new" page, and even the evolution you've made of the idea about link a blog from TDN: "wikify this blog" sounds pretty cool.
Torque 3D Owner Stephen Zepp
We continuously monitor helpful community members, evaluate their answers and contributions, and if they are consistent over time, they are awarded Associates Status, which includes access to a private forum where we sometimes release information and alpha/beta test code, as well as a nifty "Associate" tag on their user name.