95:
200:
228:
191:
mixed approach is not viable. Adding the ability to self-advertise or to obtain an official recommendation that not everyone can get will bring similar problems. Also, these "indirect rewards" may not be as valuable as they initially appear. A good startup needs no premature
Knowledge (XXG) article about it to progress. Recommendations from Knowledge (XXG), at the end of the day, may not help you in looking for a job. And supported feelings of elitism are just bad for your character.
251:. Bringing the discussion to a personal level ("What is your motivation? Your motivation is the root of all evil!") is not a good method of argumentation. If the editor has already contributed some good content for free and under a Free license then they are already halfway there. It is fully possible that such a contributor will be capable of understanding the several remaining issues. Hence, like with everything in Knowledge (XXG), it's better to
24:
239:. You will almost definitely meet some interesting people, earn respect, and feel satisfied with your new article. Just do not put any "minimal requirements" on reward, do not expect it to be proportional to your efforts, and most importantly, do not tie the possible benefits with the value of your contribution and your personality.
80:
178:
Reasons why personal rewards are not possible are deeper than just lack of resources and have roots in the evaluation of one's contributions. It is not just difficult, but impossible, by design, to know which editors are "better" than others. Edit counts or new article counts are not good indicators
169:
In all these cases, the answer is a clear "no". Knowledge (XXG) does not give any reward other than the presence of the great encyclopedia on the web. It is your choice to contribute a little, to contribute a lot, to not contribute, or to contribute short-lived vandalism. There will be no payment in
190:
Projects that have tried to have both free and paid contributors have observed fiery conflicts between these two groups, with the elite groups acting rude and arrogant while the non-elite groups ask why they should work for free. It seems that while both paid and voluntary projects are possible, a
109:
and without payment to the editors, researchers and administrators. These two requirements seem necessary for a Wiki encyclopedia project to survive and thrive. If editors could "take back" their articles upon leaving then we wouldn't have much of an encyclopedia. If the project had to pay editors
186:
Also, having something that is only available to the "best elite contributors" would attract users who are experts in marketing themselves as "the best experts". The ability to market one's own significance to the project is a skill that may or may not correlate with the actual value of
187:
contributions; furthermore, this skill includes attempting to show (convincingly, if well done) that the "competitors" (other users) are inferior, as their contributions are not as good. Are you sure you want this hierarchical structure, where you may or may not be a "winner"?
179:
because they tell nothing about the quality of one's work. And a rating system, if one was implemented, would be sensitive to real-world social networks; editors who know each other in real life are more likely to give good certifications to each other. In addition, various
148:
215:
to contribute to
Knowledge (XXG). Many contribute simply because they think the world becomes a better place with many people acting like them, sharing their knowledge and building a better encyclopedia. Following some philosophers,
110:
and researchers, it would not be financially feasible. Some people, however, still expect other indirect rewards. This may come from their evil/egoistic personality, but it may also come from
170:
any of these cases. Please know this, especially before starting a hundred-article project. Otherwise you may end up in a deep and unexpected conflict against the community.
88:
You should contribute to
Knowledge (XXG) because you think the world becomes a better place with many people acting like you. Do not expect additional reward of any kind.
152:
94:
248:
221:
131:
39:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
294:
40:
138:
204:
124:
247:
Do not meet requirements and proposals for extra reward with personal attacks about narcissism and urgent proposals to go away,
252:
212:
111:
269:
289:
274:
180:
199:
159:
264:
217:
44:
54:
236:
32:
220:, if the only remaining, makes you similar to God. Even the expectation of simple rewards like
144:"Could I get from Knowledge (XXG) a kind of recommendation that may help for me to find a job?"
227:
106:
165:"Could I get my friend unbanned? I wrote so many articles and I want my friend unbanned!"
235:
Of course, this does not mean that your contribution to
Knowledge (XXG) will be plain
283:
47:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
130:"I have devoted that much attention to community, could I now require a little bit
123:"I wrote that many really good articles, could I now post one more article about
114:. This page exists to clear up any misconceptions regarding rewards for editing.
99:
255:
and try to explain what's wrong, perhaps by linking to this essay.
198:
93:
74:
18:
231:
Editing
Knowledge (XXG) (probably) won't feel like this
62:
105:Knowledge (XXG) content is contributed with an
100:doing a good deed with no expectation of reward
8:
249:even if you believe the former to be true
226:
141:for the sake of emotional satisfaction?"
41:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
224:goes against the purpose of the site.
162:of your online sources that feed you?"
183:would be sensitive to sock puppetry.
7:
45:thoroughly vetted by the community
14:
243:Dealing with selfish requirements
78:
22:
16:Essay on editing Knowledge (XXG)
295:Knowledge (XXG) warning essays
203:God is so independent that he
1:
207:from the world he is building
275:Knowledge (XXG):Bounty board
174:Why rewards are not possible
149:my new non-profit initiative
311:
195:Right reason to contribute
52:
137:"Can I get some official
107:irreversible free license
237:"suffering on the cross"
160:increase the search rank
155:or self-published book?"
118:Expectations for rewards
86:This page in a nutshell:
290:Knowledge (XXG) essays
265:Categorical imperative
232:
222:emotional satisfaction
208:
205:does not need anything
102:
98:An example of someone
230:
202:
127:open source project?"
97:
43:, as it has not been
270:WP:Expect no thanks
211:There are a lot of
147:"Could you promote
233:
209:
125:my not yet notable
112:simple unawareness
103:
253:assume good faith
92:
91:
73:
72:
302:
82:
81:
75:
65:
26:
25:
19:
310:
309:
305:
304:
303:
301:
300:
299:
280:
279:
261:
245:
218:this motivation
197:
176:
120:
79:
69:
68:
61:
57:
49:
48:
23:
17:
12:
11:
5:
308:
306:
298:
297:
292:
282:
281:
278:
277:
272:
267:
260:
257:
244:
241:
196:
193:
175:
172:
167:
166:
163:
156:
145:
142:
135:
132:more attention
128:
119:
116:
90:
89:
83:
71:
70:
67:
66:
58:
53:
50:
38:
37:
29:
27:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
307:
296:
293:
291:
288:
287:
285:
276:
273:
271:
268:
266:
263:
262:
258:
256:
254:
250:
242:
240:
238:
229:
225:
223:
219:
214:
206:
201:
194:
192:
188:
184:
182:
173:
171:
164:
161:
157:
154:
150:
146:
143:
140:
139:higher status
136:
133:
129:
126:
122:
121:
117:
115:
113:
108:
101:
96:
87:
84:
77:
76:
64:
60:
59:
56:
51:
46:
42:
36:
34:
28:
21:
20:
246:
234:
213:good reasons
210:
189:
185:
177:
168:
134:for myself?"
104:
85:
30:
158:"Could you
31:This is an
284:Categories
259:See also
55:Shortcut
63:WP:DNER
181:votes
33:essay
153:band
151:or
286::
35:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
