~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss

16 10

"The Hidden Costs of Requiring Accounts"

Details
Message ID
<87y25jbxg5.fsf@melete.silentflame.com>
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
Hello,

    We analyze data from “natural experiments” that occurred when 136
    wikis on Fandom.com started requiring user accounts. Although we
    find strong evidence that the account requirements deterred low
    quality contributions, this came at a substantial (and usually
    hidden) cost: a much larger decrease in high quality contributions.

<https://blog.communitydata.science/the-hidden-costs-of-requiring-accounts/>

I don't know whether or to what extent these findings are applicable to
software contributions, but seems relevant to the sr.ht model of not
requiring accounts for contributions, just git-send-email(1).

-- 
Sean Whitton
Details
Message ID
<CFUFIDLGCNFD.1KU8QZF8HQBIT@taiga>
In-Reply-To
<87y25jbxg5.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
Hi Sean! Can you publish this paper on arXiv? I found it on Sci-Hub, but
open science should be the standard, not the workaround. I have some
comments to add but I'll hold them until the paper is freely available.
Details
Message ID
<YZipt8PPGZtZo7ns@thristian.org>
In-Reply-To
<CFUFIDLGCNFD.1KU8QZF8HQBIT@taiga> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 08:29:38AM +0100, Drew DeVault wrote:
> Hi Sean! Can you publish this paper on arXiv? I found it on Sci-Hub, but
> open science should be the standard, not the workaround. I have some
> comments to add but I'll hold them until the paper is freely available.

I don't think Sean is one of the authors, but the blog-post they link to
includes a link to a non-paywalled PDF hosted on the primary author's
personal website:

https://mako.cc/academic/hill_shaw-hidden_costs_of_requiring_accounts-PREPRINT.pdf
Details
Message ID
<6316bae0aed37c00c18b3ab585fdd3d2@speleonics.com.au>
In-Reply-To
<CFUFIDLGCNFD.1KU8QZF8HQBIT@taiga> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
On 2021-11-20 6:29 pm, Drew DeVault wrote:
> Hi Sean! Can you publish this paper on arXiv? I found it on Sci-Hub, 
> but
> open science should be the standard, not the workaround. I have some
> comments to add but I'll hold them until the paper is freely available.

Sean Whitton's link
https://blog.communitydata.science/the-hidden-costs-of-requiring-accounts/
has a link to a pre-print which is here:
https://mako.cc/academic/hill_shaw-hidden_costs_of_requiring_accounts-PREPRINT.pdf

The final published version also has a link to the code and data. We are 
lucky in this case that the pre-print is available as many publishing 
places have this stuff locked up a lot more.

-- 
Mike
Details
Message ID
<CFUGNEXMP86Q.1Y15M8FA1W08P@taiga>
In-Reply-To
<6316bae0aed37c00c18b3ab585fdd3d2@speleonics.com.au> (view parent)
DKIM signature
fail
Download raw message
DKIM signature: fail
Not acceptable. Open science or no science, period.
Geert Stappers
Details
Message ID
<20211120082916.3wn6ugwe5rqjmqje@gpm.stappers.nl>
In-Reply-To
<CFUGNEXMP86Q.1Y15M8FA1W08P@taiga> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 09:23:14AM +0100, Drew DeVault wrote:
> Not acceptable. Open science or no science, period.

I hope the message reaches the academic world.

 
Groeten
Geert Stappers
-- 
Silence is hard to parse
Details
Message ID
<20211120084651.tfaf2f5zxiit45gq@MacBook-Pro-de-Adolfo.local>
In-Reply-To
<20211120082916.3wn6ugwe5rqjmqje@gpm.stappers.nl> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
>I hope the message reaches the academic world.

To be honest, this message has been sent to the academic world for
years (if not decades).

It should be already this way.
Details
Message ID
<72CDE5FF-256A-4196-861D-8457D55C3505@nxg.name>
In-Reply-To
<YZipt8PPGZtZo7ns@thristian.org> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On 20 Nov 2021, at 7:54, Tim Allen wrote:

> I don't think Sean is one of the authors, but the blog-post they link 
> to
> includes a link to a non-paywalled PDF hosted on the primary author's
> personal website:

Just by the way, the (May 2020) paper does appear to be currently open 
access on the publisher website: 
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0093650220910345 (thus either Gold OA, or the 
variant which makes it OA after an embargo period).

-- 
Norman Gray  :  https://nxg.me.uk
Details
Message ID
<CFUQIPVVO732.29MTT95I24NS1@amestris>
In-Reply-To
<20211120084651.tfaf2f5zxiit45gq@MacBook-Pro-de-Adolfo.local> (view parent)
DKIM signature
fail
Download raw message
DKIM signature: fail
On Sat Nov 20, 2021 at 3:46 AM EST, Adolfo Santiago wrote:
> >I hope the message reaches the academic world.
>
> To be honest, this message has been sent to the academic world for
> years (if not decades).
>
> It should be already this way.

Most preprints in my field, like this paper, are available on author's
websites or HTML versions are accessible on pubmed. I don't mind
journals having some paywall on final products--they're maintaining
publishing houses, employing editors, maintaining websites, adding
additional content, etc. Do we want them to move to an ad-driven
business model or something else where they instead pay for their
services by mining their users?
Details
Message ID
<CFURM1XI2KHQ.1W1ECBJHN2COB@taiga>
In-Reply-To
<CFUQIPVVO732.29MTT95I24NS1@amestris> (view parent)
DKIM signature
fail
Download raw message
DKIM signature: fail
On Sat Nov 20, 2021 at 5:07 PM CET, Nathan Guerin wrote:
> Most preprints in my field, like this paper, are available on author's
> websites or HTML versions are accessible on pubmed. I don't mind
> journals having some paywall on final products--they're maintaining
> publishing houses, employing editors, maintaining websites, adding
> additional content, etc. Do we want them to move to an ad-driven
> business model or something else where they instead pay for their
> services by mining their users?

Their business model is entirely obsolete. I want them to close their
doors for good. Publish papers on your institution's website.
Details
Message ID
<CFUS0Y927YAD.1CZF96T7W2LCP@amestris>
In-Reply-To
<CFURM1XI2KHQ.1W1ECBJHN2COB@taiga> (view parent)
DKIM signature
fail
Download raw message
DKIM signature: fail
> Their business model is entirely obsolete. I want them to close their
> doors for good. Publish papers on your institution's website.

But I thought in an earlier email someone pointed out that this paper
is available on the authors' lab's website?
Details
Message ID
<CFUS5LA2IBG4.38EN8O4LFZJX8@taiga>
In-Reply-To
<CFUS0Y927YAD.1CZF96T7W2LCP@amestris> (view parent)
DKIM signature
fail
Download raw message
DKIM signature: fail
On Sat Nov 20, 2021 at 6:18 PM CET, Nathan Guerin wrote:
> But I thought in an earlier email someone pointed out that this paper
> is available on the authors' lab's website?

Yeah, in this case it is. Sorry! I got caught up in defending open
access science.

So, as promised, here are my comments on this paper:

It's a neat study with an attractive conclusion, though I'm unsure about
how well it will generalize, even within the narrow domain of wikis. I
can offer some anecdotal insights from SourceHut also.

One thing wikis have that SourceHut does not is a very small barrier to
entry. The edit button is one click away, but setting up git send-email
can take some work, and you need an account to use the git.sr.ht web
tools. However, once set up, many users report finding the process much
smoother, including reduced friction in contributing to new projects. It
takes a couple of keystrokes to send a patch once the initial setup is
done.

Also, some have noted that the extra setup cost is not necessarily a bad
thing, because it requires the user to demonstrate some technical
competence in advance of sending the patch, which increases the odds
that the patch will be good. This study seems to reject this benefit in
the case of wikis, so I'm curious if a similar study on forges would
have similar conclusions.
Sean Whitton
Details
Message ID
<87k0h2bfo1.fsf@melete.silentflame.com>
In-Reply-To
<CFUFIDLGCNFD.1KU8QZF8HQBIT@taiga> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
Hello,

On Sat 20 Nov 2021 at 08:29AM +01, Drew DeVault wrote:

> Hi Sean! Can you publish this paper on arXiv? I found it on Sci-Hub, but
> open science should be the standard, not the workaround. I have some
> comments to add but I'll hold them until the paper is freely available.

As someone else has mentioned, I'm not an author, just sharing an
interesting link.

-- 
Sean Whitton
Benj. Mako Hill
Details
Message ID
<20211120230339.llies3jq7sfd64uw@atdot.cc>
In-Reply-To
<CFUFIDLGCNFD.1KU8QZF8HQBIT@taiga> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
Greetings!

I'm the author, not Sean. I'm was CCed on this email so I'm not really
sure who or how many people I'm writing to here. :) But, Hi!

Thanks for sharing my paper, Sean! I really appreciate it!

<quote who="Drew DeVault" date="Sat, Nov 20, 2021 at 08:29:38AM +0100">
> Hi Sean! Can you publish this paper on arXiv? I found it on Sci-Hub, but
> open science should be the standard, not the workaround.

The paper is open access (somewhere between green and gold OA) and has
been publicly available for quite some time. I completely agree that
open science should be the standard and I've made the paper, the code,
and data fully available.

The paper itself is publicly available in the US National Science
Foundation's Public Access Repository (NSF-PAR) and several other
places. It appears to freely available from the journal publisher too
but I don't know if that is a permanent thing or if the journal might
change that in the future. That's why I linked to the copies that I
know will always be free with a pointer to the "published" version.

Things published in social science journals don't typically go to
arXiv since we have other preprint servers but since you requested it,
I've uploaded a copy to arXiv too. It will be published there soon.

Although the journal who republished it added some of their own
formatting and stuff, this is the final version of the paper:

https://mako.cc/academic/hill_shaw-hidden_costs_of_requiring_accounts-PREPRINT.pdf

> I have some comments to add but I'll hold them until the paper is
> freely available.

I'd love to hear your comments whenever you are ready to share them.

Regards,
Mako

-- 
Benjamin Mako Hill
https://mako.cc/academic/
Details
Message ID
<dc8a029da335d9a48ce112da37a30c6b6200e755.camel@e.email>
In-Reply-To
<20211120230339.llies3jq7sfd64uw@atdot.cc> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
Hi Mako,

On Sat, 2021-11-20 at 15:03 -0800, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> Greetings!
> 
> I'm the author, not Sean. I'm was CCed on this email so I'm not
> really
> sure who or how many people I'm writing to here. :) But, Hi!
> 
> Thanks for sharing my paper, Sean! I really appreciate it!

The email you replied to was sent to a mailing list that you are not
subscribed to, and you were not CC'd on all of the responses. Here[1]
is a link to the archives.

> I'd love to hear your comments whenever you are ready to share them.

Drew already responded; he just didn't CC you.

Regards,
Maxwell

[1]:
https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3C87y25jbxg5.fsf%40melete.silentflame.com%3E

-- 
Maxwell G
Pronouns: He/Him/His
gotmax@e.email
Details
Message ID
<CFW4Q664JR8D.4IOPHJDITPK2@taiga>
In-Reply-To
<20211120230339.llies3jq7sfd64uw@atdot.cc> (view parent)
DKIM signature
pass
Download raw message
On Sun Nov 21, 2021 at 12:03 AM CET, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> The paper is open access (somewhere between green and gold OA) and has
> been publicly available for quite some time. I completely agree that
> open science should be the standard and I've made the paper, the code,
> and data fully available.

Wonderful! It was not clear from the initial blog post.

> Things published in social science journals don't typically go to
> arXiv since we have other preprint servers but since you requested it,
> I've uploaded a copy to arXiv too. It will be published there soon.

Thanks! Should make it easier to find.

> > I have some comments to add but I'll hold them until the paper is
> > freely available.
>
> I'd love to hear your comments whenever you are ready to share them.

I think someone provided a link to these. Cheers!
Details
Message ID
<E86DA739-141F-4587-B859-58A190E8A2E1@nxg.name>
In-Reply-To
<CFW4Q664JR8D.4IOPHJDITPK2@taiga> (view parent)
DKIM signature
missing
Download raw message
On 22 Nov 2021, at 7:27, Drew DeVault wrote:

> On Sun Nov 21, 2021 at 12:03 AM CET, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
>> The paper is open access (somewhere between green and gold OA) and has
>>
>> been publicly available for quite some time. I completely agree that
>>
>> open science should be the standard and I've made the paper, the code,
>>
>> and data fully available.
>
>  Wonderful! It was not clear from the initial blog post.

To be scrupulously fair to the paper's authors, unless the blogpost has been edited since its first mention here [1], it does seem _fairly_ clear from the blogpost's final paragraph that the paper and its replication materials is available from multiple sources:

> If you do not have access to the paywalled journal, please check out this pre-print or get in touch with us. We have also released replication materials for the paper, including all the data and code used to conduct the analysis and compile the paper itself.

Best wishes,

Norman


[1] https://blog.communitydata.science/the-hidden-costs-of-requiring-accounts/

-- 
Norman Gray  :  https://nxg.me.uk
Reply to thread Export thread (mbox)