Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

Return to Answer

MSE is the oddball, not MSO
Source Link
Picachieu
Picachieu
  • 8.8k
  • 4
  • 29
  • 61

Let's first look at what Community Wiki posts do:

  • Greatly lower the reputation requirement for editing the post
  • Prevent the post from yielding reputation from votes
  • Reduce the profile of the attribution

Edit reputation requirement

A big issue with the reputation requirement on meta (the exception being MSOMSE), where these posts are hosted, is that there are no suggested edits. An edit can only be done by higher-reputation users.
posts are generally about one subject at a time, with one all-encompassing answer to that subject. This means that, whenever something changes about the state of affairs regarding that post, it should be easy to amend and update, rather than requiring someone with high-reputation to edit it. There is, essentially, no way (except for a flag) to inform these high-reputation users of the necessary edit.

That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.

Post reputation yield

That's a tricky one. See, non-MSOMSE metas don't actually have reputation, so this seems irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, kinda. The reputation (or, rather, the computed votes) still exist, contribute to tag score and various badges. The fundamental problem of actual reputation yield, however, is relevant only to MSOMSE, so this can - largely - be ignored for non-MSOMSE metas.

Attribution

There's a big difference between how a Community Wiki post is attributed and how a regular post is attributed. A Community Wiki post is much more subtle, and points out rather clearly that the post is a community effort, rather than the work of a single user. posts are not supposed to be the work of one user, but a community aid, decision or other important notice. Attributing these (with the coverage they get) to a single user seems rather dishonest to the community at large.

Conclusion

In my opinion, especially that third point is a good reason to keep the Community Wiki status on posts, even on non-MSO metas. More often than not these posts aren't even original content, but instead stripped straight from MSO, so it makes sense to go with low-profile attribution.
At the end of the day, it's up to the individual site to decide, but I feel there are very good reasons to maintain this.

Let's first look at what Community Wiki posts do:

  • Greatly lower the reputation requirement for editing the post
  • Prevent the post from yielding reputation from votes
  • Reduce the profile of the attribution

Edit reputation requirement

A big issue with the reputation requirement on meta (the exception being MSO), where these posts are hosted, is that there are no suggested edits. An edit can only be done by higher-reputation users.
posts are generally about one subject at a time, with one all-encompassing answer to that subject. This means that, whenever something changes about the state of affairs regarding that post, it should be easy to amend and update, rather than requiring someone with high-reputation to edit it. There is, essentially, no way (except for a flag) to inform these high-reputation users of the necessary edit.

That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.

Post reputation yield

That's a tricky one. See, non-MSO metas don't actually have reputation, so this seems irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, kinda. The reputation (or, rather, the computed votes) still exist, contribute to tag score and various badges. The fundamental problem of actual reputation yield, however, is relevant only to MSO, so this can - largely - be ignored for non-MSO metas.

Attribution

There's a big difference between how a Community Wiki post is attributed and how a regular post is attributed. A Community Wiki post is much more subtle, and points out rather clearly that the post is a community effort, rather than the work of a single user. posts are not supposed to be the work of one user, but a community aid, decision or other important notice. Attributing these (with the coverage they get) to a single user seems rather dishonest to the community at large.

Conclusion

In my opinion, especially that third point is a good reason to keep the Community Wiki status on posts, even on non-MSO metas. More often than not these posts aren't even original content, but instead stripped straight from MSO, so it makes sense to go with low-profile attribution.
At the end of the day, it's up to the individual site to decide, but I feel there are very good reasons to maintain this.

Let's first look at what Community Wiki posts do:

  • Greatly lower the reputation requirement for editing the post
  • Prevent the post from yielding reputation from votes
  • Reduce the profile of the attribution

Edit reputation requirement

A big issue with the reputation requirement on meta (the exception being MSE), where these posts are hosted, is that there are no suggested edits. An edit can only be done by higher-reputation users.
posts are generally about one subject at a time, with one all-encompassing answer to that subject. This means that, whenever something changes about the state of affairs regarding that post, it should be easy to amend and update, rather than requiring someone with high-reputation to edit it. There is, essentially, no way (except for a flag) to inform these high-reputation users of the necessary edit.

That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.

Post reputation yield

That's a tricky one. See, non-MSE metas don't actually have reputation, so this seems irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, kinda. The reputation (or, rather, the computed votes) still exist, contribute to tag score and various badges. The fundamental problem of actual reputation yield, however, is relevant only to MSE, so this can - largely - be ignored for non-MSE metas.

Attribution

There's a big difference between how a Community Wiki post is attributed and how a regular post is attributed. A Community Wiki post is much more subtle, and points out rather clearly that the post is a community effort, rather than the work of a single user. posts are not supposed to be the work of one user, but a community aid, decision or other important notice. Attributing these (with the coverage they get) to a single user seems rather dishonest to the community at large.

Conclusion

In my opinion, especially that third point is a good reason to keep the Community Wiki status on posts, even on non-MSO metas. More often than not these posts aren't even original content, but instead stripped straight from MSO, so it makes sense to go with low-profile attribution.
At the end of the day, it's up to the individual site to decide, but I feel there are very good reasons to maintain this.

update reflecting change to CW, might need additional changes to the whole post
Source Link
user98085
user98085
  • 2.4k
  • 18
  • 19

Let's first look at what Community Wiki posts do:

  • Greatly lower the reputation requirement for editing the post
  • Prevent the post from yielding reputation from votes
  • Reduce the profile of the attribution

Edit reputation requirement

A big issue with the reputation requirement on meta (the exception being MSO), where these posts are hosted, is that there are no suggested edits. An edit can only be done by higher-reputation users.
posts are generally about one subject at a time, with one all-encompassing answer to that subject. This means that, whenever something changes about the state of affairs regarding that post, it should be easy to amend and update, rather than requiring someone with high-reputation to edit it. There is, essentially, no way (except for a flag) to inform these high-reputation users of the necessary edit.

That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.

Post reputation yield

That's a tricky one. See, non-MSO metas don't actually have reputation, so this seems irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, kinda. The reputation (or, rather, the computed votes) still exist, contribute to tag score and various badges. The fundamental problem of actual reputation yield, however, is relevant only to MSO, so this can - largely - be ignored for non-MSO metas.

Attribution

There's a big difference between how a Community Wiki post is attributed and how a regular post is attributed. A Community Wiki post is much more subtle, and points out rather clearly that the post is a community effort, rather than the work of a single user. posts are not supposed to be the work of one user, but a community aid, decision or other important notice. Attributing these (with the coverage they get) to a single user seems rather dishonest to the community at large.

Conclusion

In my opinion, especially that third point is a good reason to keep the Community Wiki status on posts, even on non-MSO metas. More often than not these posts aren't even original content, but instead stripped straight from MSO, so it makes sense to go with low-profile attribution.
At the end of the day, it's up to the individual site to decide, but I feel there are very good reasons to maintain this.

Let's first look at what Community Wiki posts do:

  • Greatly lower the reputation requirement for editing the post
  • Prevent the post from yielding reputation from votes
  • Reduce the profile of the attribution

Edit reputation requirement

A big issue with the reputation requirement on meta (the exception being MSO), where these posts are hosted, is that there are no suggested edits. An edit can only be done by higher-reputation users.
posts are generally about one subject at a time, with one all-encompassing answer to that subject. This means that, whenever something changes about the state of affairs regarding that post, it should be easy to amend and update, rather than requiring someone with high-reputation to edit it. There is, essentially, no way (except for a flag) to inform these high-reputation users of the necessary edit.

That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.

Post reputation yield

That's a tricky one. See, non-MSO metas don't actually have reputation, so this seems irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, kinda. The reputation (or, rather, the computed votes) still exist, contribute to tag score and various badges. The fundamental problem of actual reputation yield, however, is relevant only to MSO, so this can - largely - be ignored for non-MSO metas.

Attribution

There's a big difference between how a Community Wiki post is attributed and how a regular post is attributed. A Community Wiki post is much more subtle, and points out rather clearly that the post is a community effort, rather than the work of a single user. posts are not supposed to be the work of one user, but a community aid, decision or other important notice. Attributing these (with the coverage they get) to a single user seems rather dishonest to the community at large.

Conclusion

In my opinion, especially that third point is a good reason to keep the Community Wiki status on posts, even on non-MSO metas. More often than not these posts aren't even original content, but instead stripped straight from MSO, so it makes sense to go with low-profile attribution.
At the end of the day, it's up to the individual site to decide, but I feel there are very good reasons to maintain this.

Let's first look at what Community Wiki posts do:

  • Greatly lower the reputation requirement for editing the post
  • Prevent the post from yielding reputation from votes
  • Reduce the profile of the attribution

Edit reputation requirement

A big issue with the reputation requirement on meta (the exception being MSO), where these posts are hosted, is that there are no suggested edits. An edit can only be done by higher-reputation users.
posts are generally about one subject at a time, with one all-encompassing answer to that subject. This means that, whenever something changes about the state of affairs regarding that post, it should be easy to amend and update, rather than requiring someone with high-reputation to edit it. There is, essentially, no way (except for a flag) to inform these high-reputation users of the necessary edit.

That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.

Post reputation yield

That's a tricky one. See, non-MSO metas don't actually have reputation, so this seems irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, kinda. The reputation (or, rather, the computed votes) still exist, contribute to tag score and various badges. The fundamental problem of actual reputation yield, however, is relevant only to MSO, so this can - largely - be ignored for non-MSO metas.

Attribution

There's a big difference between how a Community Wiki post is attributed and how a regular post is attributed. A Community Wiki post is much more subtle, and points out rather clearly that the post is a community effort, rather than the work of a single user. posts are not supposed to be the work of one user, but a community aid, decision or other important notice. Attributing these (with the coverage they get) to a single user seems rather dishonest to the community at large.

Conclusion

In my opinion, especially that third point is a good reason to keep the Community Wiki status on posts, even on non-MSO metas. More often than not these posts aren't even original content, but instead stripped straight from MSO, so it makes sense to go with low-profile attribution.
At the end of the day, it's up to the individual site to decide, but I feel there are very good reasons to maintain this.

Source Link
user98085
user98085
  • 2.4k
  • 18
  • 19

Let's first look at what Community Wiki posts do:

  • Greatly lower the reputation requirement for editing the post
  • Prevent the post from yielding reputation from votes
  • Reduce the profile of the attribution

Edit reputation requirement

A big issue with the reputation requirement on meta (the exception being MSO), where these posts are hosted, is that there are no suggested edits. An edit can only be done by higher-reputation users.
posts are generally about one subject at a time, with one all-encompassing answer to that subject. This means that, whenever something changes about the state of affairs regarding that post, it should be easy to amend and update, rather than requiring someone with high-reputation to edit it. There is, essentially, no way (except for a flag) to inform these high-reputation users of the necessary edit.

That said, by the nature of the SE system, such a post would become a Community Wiki organically - after a given amount of edits it is automatically converted.

Post reputation yield

That's a tricky one. See, non-MSO metas don't actually have reputation, so this seems irrelevant, doesn't it? Well, kinda. The reputation (or, rather, the computed votes) still exist, contribute to tag score and various badges. The fundamental problem of actual reputation yield, however, is relevant only to MSO, so this can - largely - be ignored for non-MSO metas.

Attribution

There's a big difference between how a Community Wiki post is attributed and how a regular post is attributed. A Community Wiki post is much more subtle, and points out rather clearly that the post is a community effort, rather than the work of a single user. posts are not supposed to be the work of one user, but a community aid, decision or other important notice. Attributing these (with the coverage they get) to a single user seems rather dishonest to the community at large.

Conclusion

In my opinion, especially that third point is a good reason to keep the Community Wiki status on posts, even on non-MSO metas. More often than not these posts aren't even original content, but instead stripped straight from MSO, so it makes sense to go with low-profile attribution.
At the end of the day, it's up to the individual site to decide, but I feel there are very good reasons to maintain this.