{"id":1465,"date":"2013-07-02T21:28:05","date_gmt":"2013-07-02T21:28:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/notebooks.dataone.org\/?p=1465"},"modified":"2019-05-24T17:38:35","modified_gmt":"2019-05-24T17:38:35","slug":"scoring-and-reputation-in-the-metadictionary","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/notebooks.dataone.org\/metadata-registry\/scoring-and-reputation-in-the-metadictionary\/","title":{"rendered":"Scoring and reputation in the metadictionary"},"content":{"rendered":"
I spent the last couple days working on a system for scoring and classifying metadictionary terms with reputation based crowd-sourcing. It’s hard to succinctly describe the goals of the system I’m proposing, but I’ll try:<\/p>\n
Please give the attached write-up a read. I also suggest some additions to the interface. Pending approval from my working group, I’ll be ready to start implementing these things tomorrow.<\/p>\n
Here you go: scoring.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" I spent the last couple days working on a system for scoring and classifying metadictionary terms with reputation based crowd-sourcing. It’s hard to succinctly describe the goals of the system I’m proposing, but I’ll try: Each newly proposed term should have an equal chance of succeeding, despite reputation. At the Continue reading Scoring and reputation in the metadictionary<\/span>