= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Stefan_Schubert comments on The value of the online hive mind - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (20)
Thanks! Someone tipped me about that before in fact, but I had half forgotten about it.
However, I think this could be done outside of mathematics, too. Also, I think that one could debate how people are to be given credit for their work on the collaborative project. Polymath don't give explicit credit to individual contributors, but in my system, you would. The details of this are very important, since you need to give time-pressed researchers incentives to participate in a system like this.
Time-pressured researchers do things like reviewing papers of journals without someone paying them to do so. Being a reviewer is having power over a peer. It's a kind of social status.
I don't think researchers review papers because they want to have power over their peers. I think they do it because it is a community norm and beneficial to their community. This is similar to why people avoid littering. Status games may still enter into it because how often someone litters or reviews papers affects their reputation.