The FFDB won't have a fic archive, community forums or review mechanisms (unless I, The Benevolent Dictator, decide otherwise). I do not wish to compete with existing fandom sites. The FFDB is an index, a navigation aid for people exploring the vast reaches of Harry Potter fan fiction. It is not an attempt to take over FAP.
I have never said it would have a fic quality rating system, but I see there is no choice - it is its killer feature. That would mean a strong authentication mechanism is a basic requirement (not necessarily employing strong crypto - it's not an ecommerce application after all).
The triple user group voting should be treated like this:
- All votes are recorded. This allows a person to have a change of heart, makes results more trustworthy and allows identifying scams of most kinds. Also, when a user's type changes, it allows recalculating the vote results.
- All users have "author" and "staff" flags. If author flag is set - user's vote counts towards the "collegiate" result. Same for staff.
If someone registered and voted for some fics and then successfully claimed ownership of a fic (meaning proved to the staff's satisfaction that he is the author of a listed fic) and became known as an author, his votes will be counted for the collegiate score of the fics he'd previously voted for (and all his successive votes, up to the point when user's authorship claim is discovered as fraudulent and user is de-authored or even dismembered). If he then pays for my visit of a North American fandom event and becomes mod or other staff member, staff scores become affected and are recalculated to show the staff's bias towards H/G and R/H fics.
Technical note: If calculation is too intensive a task, it could be done nightly rather then immediately (means you'll only see your vote change the results overnight).
Note: I write in the male form because I'm male and because I think it's the customary generic form in the English language. The fandom's demographics being what they are, you can safely replace it with the female form, and be correct.
Note: “staff” does not imply “author”. For example: my votes would not affect collegiate scores.
As for the case where results differ too much: well, let's hope the more exclusive the voting public gets, the better their taste becomes, so no popular trash fics get high staff scores. That would mean being very thorough with recruiting, following the "A's hire A's, but B's hire C's" rule. In any case, all three scores would be displayed, color-coded I guess.
No fics shall be excluded. Even the really nasty and bad ones. Since they’re not hosted but rather only linked to, if enough clear warnings are provided – I don’t see why I should exclude them. Teri is correct in spotting the IMDB resemblance.
Every data page will have a “report abuse” link, and the
All but the basic content will have a “reference/proof” comment, not usually displayed, but stored. It would detail where the data comes from (preferably in the form of a URL), so mistakes and con jobs can be traced and angry people seeing their online anonymity bubble burst calmed down.
Technical note: For items containing a list of known pre-determined values (like a list of characters or genres, not a list of authors of fics that grow), I’ll implement it with bitmaps. It can be fast and storage-friendly.
Please comment more. I’ll edit what I have and add details (or, more likely, specific questions about the details) when I have the time.
