The Quality of Our Archives
Posted by Michael on 4 March 2004, 22:29 GMT
You may have noticed the low numbers of new files added to our archives. We're having a debate about what to do with a growing problem: Programs that simply aren't very useful to anyone. There are more quadratic solvers in our archives than should ever exist, notwithstanding the fact that most models have this as a built-in feature. Our possible solutions are:
Currently, all files that meet the site policies are processed and uploaded to our archives. Since this doesn't seem to be working well, here are the ideas under consideration:
- The file archivers could manually screen programs for those deemed "junk", in the sense that they lower the signal-to-noise ratio of our archives rather than increase it. Authors would have to e-mail an appeal for rejected programs. This would cause a longer waiting time for processing files.
- We could implement a rating system and organize programs by rating. This allows all programs to remain on the site, but the most useless could be filtered out. A method of dealing with new programs and low/high numbers of votes would have to be developed.
- Our current folder system stops at games, programs, math, et cetera. For ease of browsing, this could be expanded to sub-categories like games/board, games/shooter, and games/guessthenumber. This doesn't limit the number of files added, it only categorizes them so folders are more concise and relevant.
- Lastly, we could just leave everything as it is now.
We're asking for your input on what to do. There is a survey posted in conjunction with this article where you can vote on this issue. Thank you.
Update (Archiver): We will not be deleting files (at least not this time around), that was never one of the options. If you do want some of your programs deleted e-mail filearchive@ticalc.org.
|
|
Reply to this article
|
The comments below are written by ticalc.org visitors. Their views are not necessarily those of ticalc.org, and ticalc.org takes no responsibility for their content.
|
|
Re: The Quality of Our Archives
|
Yan Zhuang
|
Even though it would take longer time, I suggest for the file archivers to manually screen programs for useless content. I am so sick of programs that do nothing but say "Hello I am Bob."
|
Reply to this comment
|
4 March 2004, 23:35 GMT
|
|
SUBCATEGORIZATION IS THE ANSWER!!
|
NEO3.14
|
If we could break down folders such as "Games", or "Math" into smaller files, it would make life so much easer! We would still have the crap, but it would be right next to other programs like it that might be better. Rejecting programs is NOT the answer! Beginning programmers might not have the most original programs, but they need the exposure! This is what allows young programmers to flourish into the great programmers of the future! How many programmers out there have not made a "Hello World" program? Very few. Give young programmers a chance! Also, options are great. Maybe I don't want a program that can do the quadratic equation AND wipe my butt, because it takes up too much memory. We need the options! Keep the junk, but break it down so we can find alternatives and give young programmers a chance!
|
Reply to this comment
|
4 March 2004, 23:41 GMT
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.
|