OpenWetWare:Information management/Protocol curators

Topic: At the last steering committee meeting, we discussed the soon to be submitted Nature comment about OWW protocols. There was a fair bit of discussion about consensus protocols in general, as well as whether having one (or several) listed editors/curators for a protocol is a good idea. Just wanted to start a discussion on the wiki about whether we want to have protocol curator(s) and the best way to implement it.

---

Jasonk 11:38, 10 November 2006 (EST):So some general pro/cons for having an editor/curator that came up are:

Pro's:

1. Perceived credibility - someone putting their name on it implies that they are in some way vouching for the quality.
2. Incentive - by putting your name on as curator you are more likely to do the hard work of collecting the information, etc.

Con's:

1. Disincentive - by seeing someone else's name on a protocol I may be less inclined to improve it, because I think it "belongs to them" (e.g. I'd be changing someone else's work).