From 0f7a39b0efedbe2d541dd44840321fee10eb9a70 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lyudmila Vaseva <vaseva@mi.fu-berlin.de>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2019 17:36:27 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Add notes from last week to thesis
---
thesis/2-Background.tex | 4 ++++
thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex | 9 +++++++++
thesis/6-Discussion.tex | 10 ++++++++++
3 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
diff --git a/thesis/2-Background.tex b/thesis/2-Background.tex
index cc40e9b..c791ea3 100644
--- a/thesis/2-Background.tex
+++ b/thesis/2-Background.tex
@@ -65,7 +65,11 @@ Distinction filters/Bots: what tasks are handled by bots and what by filters (an
socio-technical assemblages (see Geiger)
+* Huggle, Twinkle, AWB, Bots exist nearly since the very beginning (2002?), why did the community introduce filters in 2009?
+
\subsection{Humans}
+* what part of the quality control work do humans take over? (in contrast to the algorithmic mechanisms)
+
\subsection{Semi-automatic tools}
\subsection{Bots}
\subsection{ORES}
diff --git a/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex b/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex
index d370a88..0dabb79 100644
--- a/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex
+++ b/thesis/4-Edit-Filters.tex
@@ -8,6 +8,15 @@ algorithmic governance?/socio-technical assemblage
\section{Genesis}
+* what's filters' genesis story? why were they implemented? (compare with Rambot story) : try to reconstruct by examining traces and old page versions
+
+% When and why were Wikipedia edit filters introduced?
+
+Edit filters were first introduced on the English Wikipedia in 2009 under the name ``abuse filters''.
+Their clear purpose was to cope with the rising(syn) amount of vandalism as well as ``common newbie mistakes'' the encyclopedia faced~\cite{Signpost2009}.
+
+% TODO: when and why was the extension renamed
+
\section{Data}
The foundations for the present chapter lie in EN Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
diff --git a/thesis/6-Discussion.tex b/thesis/6-Discussion.tex
index c870ebd..ce75f67 100644
--- a/thesis/6-Discussion.tex
+++ b/thesis/6-Discussion.tex
@@ -29,6 +29,16 @@ on board and help them clearly communicate norms."
"designers should support an ecosystem of accessible and ap-
propriate moderator tools."
+%***************************************
+
+* a realisation: number of filters cannot grow endlessly, every edit is checked against all of them and this consumes computing power! (signaled in various places) (and apparently haven't been chucked with Moore's law). is this the reason why number of filters has been more or less constanst over the years?
+* there seems to be a hard condition limit for filters: so the active ones are best of! which filters are best-of? a theory: "I've combated so and so many occurances of vandalism X with my bot. Let us implement a filter for this"
+
+* Claudia thinks it's easier to implement a filter than a bot (less technical knowledge needed)
+* Filter trigger before a publication, Bots trigger afterwads
+ ** that's positive! editors get immmediate feedback and can adjust their (good faith) edit and publish it! which is psychologically better than publish something and have it reverted in 2 days
+* thought: filter are human centered! (if a bot edits via the API, can it trigger a filter? Actually, I think yes, there were a couple of filters with something like "vandalbot" in their public comment)
+
\section{Limitations}
--
GitLab