Grants talk:IdeaLab/Introduce reputation points and priveledges like in StackExchange

Bad idea

I think this is a bad idea: it does not matter who is making the harrassment, who is the victim, or who is denouncing the harrassment. All that matter is if it is or not, harrassment.

Eloy (talk) 02:06, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

NIMBY

Depressing proposal, not for the content but for the way it's formulated. The assumption is expressed that on StackExchange everything goes well (or well enough); so it seems that all we got from the "inspire campaign" in this case is spreading the impression that on Wikimedia everything goes wrong and any other system works better. Instead we need more analysis; you could contribute to my answer on the question "Difference between Stack Overflow and a wiki", for instance. Nemo 07:27, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Opposed

• I'm scratching my head at "only people with enough priviledge can add comments that contain harassement". You must be either joking or mistaken about what harassment means. Apart from harassment, we already have rewards for active participants in the form of badges gifted by members of the community. We also already have user classes with different privileges. On StackExchange, you get the privilege of editing others' answers and questions after collecting a certain amount of karma. You this ability already by default on Wikipedia and I don't see which other user classes one could be autopromoted to (not everybody wants to have moderation privileges). In short, I fail to see what the benefits of a StackExchange-like points and privileges system on Wikipedia would be. Please elaborate. --Doveofsymplegades (talk) 17:58, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Outsource to Third Party

It's better to develop a third party service to keep track of your editing pattern or even even rank several Wikipedians who sign up for such a service. If points and privileges become inherent to Wikipedia, it would upset a very delicate balance. StackExchange required such incentives to lure in a large userbase. In my opinion, a wikipedian isn't supposed to be easily incentivised or lured by a point system as to remain a neutral and unbiased party able to write indiscriminate articles. To write such articles is our fundamental goal. In light of that, it would be best if this idea were devloped into a third party service. I'm sure many would like to gamify Wikipedia.

NK97 (talk) 02:45, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Grants to improve your project

Greetings! The Project Grants program is currently accepting proposals for funding. The deadline for draft submissions is tommorrow. If you have ideas for software, offline outreach, research, online community organizing, or other projects that enhance the work of Wikimedia volunteers, start your proposal today! Please encourage others who have great ideas to apply as well. Support is available if you want help turning your idea into a grant request.

• Submit a grant request
• Learn from examples of completed Individual Engagement Grants or Project and Event Grants

The next open call for Project Grants will be in October 2016. You can also consider applying for a Rapid Grant, if your project does not require a large amount of funding, as applications can be submitted anytime. Feel free to ping me if you need help getting your proposal started. Thanks, I JethroBT (WMF) 22:49, 1 August 2016 (UTC)