Not quite: I would argue that anti-vandalism work is a "gateway drug" to the rest of the project. Just a hunch, though. On Nov 20, 2013 5:21 PM, "Marc A. Pelletier" <m...@uberbox.org> wrote:
> On 11/20/2013 11:59 AM, Michael Snow wrote: > > An essential part of collaboration is, after all, reviewing each other's > > work. From the terseness of the comment, it might be alluding to either > > aspect or both. > > That's actually an interesting question that has been lurking beneath > all the "editing is going down" nervousness. > > How much of that 'editing' was, in fact, busy work made immaterial by > technical advantage (bots, extensions, abusefilter)? The number of > antivandalism edits a /human/ has to do in a day has most certainly come > down a *lot* since c. 2006; this no doubt contributed to a large - now > diminishing - fraction of total edits. > > It's not clear to me that the number of *productive* edits has been > going down all that much (if at all) in the past several years; the > proportion of edits that were tedious and repetitive clearly has. > > Are you arguing that there is *value* in volunteers spending time on > work that could be automated? Except for artificially driving up edit > counts, that is time (and effort) that would be better spent pretty much > anywhere else! > > -- Marc > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>