• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

204 submissions , 162 unreviewed
5,030 questions , 2,184 unanswered
5,344 answers , 22,705 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
816 active unimported users
More ...

  Do we want reputation incentives for summarising submissions?

+ 1 like - 0 dislike

This is a refined version of this meta post to take Dilaton's objections into account.

Now that the first phase of the reviews section is up (blog post), I think it is time to bring up the issue of encouraging users to summarise papers, i.e. discuss it's physics. This is a purely voluntary thing to do, of course.

But my question here is, "Do we want reputation-based incentives for summarising papers by editing submissions on PhysicsOverflow?".

If the answer is a yes, we need to discuss the number of quality edits to submissions or number of significant (or majority-forming) contributions to submission summaries needed to qualify for this reward, and the amount of reputation offered by this award. Or maybe we could decide the reward amount by voting (like 1 vote on nomination = 10 rep) but that makes us vulnerable to politics... And once we're done with it, we'll need to discuss if we're going to keep this idea of rep-based incentives to just editing submissions, or anything else (like editing tag wikis).

asked Jun 5, 2014 in Discussion by dimension10 (1,985 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights