User:OrenBochman/Ideas

=Technical=

Some questions:

Question: Can the Caching strategy be improveded?
Caching is done using Regarding: Looking over Wikimedia Operations document it would seem that if instead of caching just anounymous pages, content were served as: IP/User Soecific
 * Memcache
 * Squid
 * Varnish

non specific nav / search / special / tools content than it would allow for a better caching startegy.

Question:function of LVS is unclear
are they simply load balancers, if so why use virtual servers ???


 * what is puppet [www.puppetlabs.com]?

=Social Wiki=

Unified/Distributed InterWiki NameSpace

 * A Place to store universal templates, gadgets, login, preferences and user information.
 * Language resolution system using a common convention.
 * Perwiki definitions sections will also be possible.

Example store user data in a XML page. Measure merit accross projects.


 * Should Unified user space provide privacy options?
 * Encourage users to provide a profile detailing thier background (perhaps based on chalanges) e.g. instead of a language level template one wold have to pass a test to qualify for a template, this would than be indicated.
 * Encourage people to state thier agenda
 * so that they will have a set of goals.
 * so they could be clustered accordingly.
 * so they could better colloborate.
 * so they can be used with colooborative filter technology.


 * Personal Blog pages within wiki sphere.
 * (Privacy Options)

Global Watchlist
Agragate changes from diffrent wikis in one place.


 * shared watchlist as per german wikipedia.
 * follow peers ,watch pages, watch diffs etc

=Permavote= A long term aproach to voting.

=Wiki Lawyer= The role of an experienced wikipedians who is a recognised authority at drafting policy documents based on communal brainstorming. NPOV

=NNPOV AKA The Minority Report= One of the core values of wikipedias is writing in a NEUTRAL POINT OF VIEW. In practice this is not always possible or even desired.

Some pages cover subject has two pravailing point of view and any view which tries to reconsile them is even less desireable. In other cases one point of view belongs to a majority while another represents a minorty.

Over time such pages polarising editors into camps and lead to revert wars and other antisocial activies. My suggestion would be to say we agreee to disagree.

Since MediaWiki alows merging why not allow forking of a document section.

Allow two (or more) point of view to co-exist within a wiki document. Goal to maximise the consensus while allowing for a minority point of view to be heard. This could be done with a template.   nuetral point of view wxplaining the diffrences between Other Point of View. One other point of view. Another Point of view.  

the ranking should indicate:
 * the minority point of view.
 * the majority point of view.