For me, the formal grammar is meant for machines and for tools creators; in this respect I find PEG to be clearer and easier to use that CFG.That's beside the point of this discussion. la .sykyndyr. proposed relying on the opinion of people who don't understand the subject.Hm, let me add precisions:
- My proposition is to make users (= "anyone registered") give rights to the ones they define as "experts". Users don't give their vote on submissions. This is indirect.
- This is "the least bad" way to define experts for now. Current definition is worse. Algorithms I told about are worse.
- This system is not meant to be perfect. This system is meant to be feasible. And any improvements are welcome, of course.
- This system may surely evolve and/or be replaced later on.
- The "experts" (as defined) would then have the responsibility of saying either "Yes, I can tackle this submission" (and vote) or "No, I can't" (and abstain).
- I rely on probability and statistics
- to ensure the system is stable and robust enough. So yes, the less users, the more unstable.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "lojban" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/lojban/e94H-wdh5gc/ .unsubscribe
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com .
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout .