4 ms·
"Really terrible" is a bit harsh imo but your comment is very insightful. Perhaps there is a middle ground? Some kind of novel solution that accounts for data
by billmalarky 7y ago
"Really terrible" is a bit harsh imo but your comment is very insightful.
Perhaps there is a middle ground? Some kind of novel solution that accounts for data coming from "real names" vs pseudonym differently?
- Dirlewanger 7y agoIf the problem is one of credibility, maybe some manual process that verifies the user is part of some prominent organization i.e. a professor in a given field or something could work. Give the user "flair" (similar to how reddit does it for r/askscience). They keep their pseudonymous username, but they're also recognized as an important figure.
- hk__2 7y ago> If the problem is one of credibility, maybe some manual process that verifies the user is part of some prominent organization i.e. a professor in a given field or something could work. Only accepting users from prominent organization would compromise the goal of having 1000x more content than Wikipedia (see the failure of Nupedia).