Re: planet "top posters" section

Hi!

As the instigator of this "top-n" posters feature, Magnus suggested
that I should weigh in. So here goes..

My goal in requesting the feature last year was to encourage more
posts, have an at-a-glance reference for outsiders to see how many
people are regularly contributing, and to encourage friendly
competition. And, given that, I'm not a fan of limiting the number of
names that can be displayed.

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:52 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>>>> That would be reasonable too, although it's a little hard to think
>>>> about how to apply that to the team section, since the individuals are
>>>> listed under the teams.  Clearly you could also omit teams with 2 or
>>>> fewer postings, but what if the team has >2 but some - or all -
>>>> individuals within the team have <=2?
>>>
>>> Well, that's an incentive to join a team.
>>
>> Hmm.  Well, by that theory, Bruce should quite his job: he'd go from
>> somewhere buried down in the weeds to the number one spot on the list.
>>
>> It's clearly not our policy to give people who are on a team a more
>> prominent position.  More like the reverse.  Personally I think I'd
>
> Yes, if any, the reverse. And we definitely don't want to promote
> team-members over individuals. Or I should say, we have traditionally
> not wanted to do that. All policies are of course up for discussion
> :-)

The original thinking behind this feature was to provide a simple
metric for people who are posting to see how they "rank" against
others, and to give folks a bit of a cheap thrill in getting their
name and a number at the top of the Planet page.

The "Teams" feature was added as a way for development teams and
businesses to market themselves, without getting to crazy about
things.

The Individual and Team listings don't show up if no posts are made,
so it is an encouragement for both to provide content. And has the
added benefit of giving outsiders a look at who contributes, and *how
many people* contribute.

>> favor just listing the top 6-10 posters (regardless of whether they're
>> on a team) and the top 6-10 teams (without listing the posters) and
>> call it good.
>
> If it doesn't show who's a member of a team, isn't that very confusing?

I think it is confusing, and a little unfair to those who are part of
a team. As we've talked about in the past, names are important.

Again, my goal in having the feature was to also show how breadth of
contribution to the aggregator.

-selena


--
http://chesnok.com/daily - me
http://endpoint.com - work