We, the coordinators, are faced with the problem of unreliable and low-quality information that people indicate when creating content for Aptos, as well as with such a problem when a person would like to provide content for verification before publishing it to the community.
We are for the content to be made not just for the sake of a tick, but first of all so that the content carries reliable and correct information.
How could we solve these 2 problems?
We propose to create a channel that is tied to a specific language. People can send content to it to get feedback from the coordinators for the presence of false information.
Each coordinator can come in and check the content that people want to publish as much as they have free time. If the coordinator has checked the content and there is no false information in it, the coordinator can respond to the message with a tick or write a comment indicating the problem.
This will help to reduce unrecognized content and reduce false information in social networks
With every day of Aptos development, we see how a huge number of people are beginning to be interested in Aptos and our task as cordinators is to make everyone who is just starting to get acquainted with Aptos receive high-quality and reliable information
For the russian speaking community participants can use already translated gitbook+all medium articles from@crnepos
In general, it makes sense at least for people who want to verify info or prepare more quality material. The same time it should be noted that it doesn’t fully solve the issue but in any case can help to form more uniform, solid and transparent info space. Upvote for that!
PPS.
it is worth noting that the Aptos development documentation has been updated, and the Russian translation needs to be updated as well. BTW corresponding grant for translation work was submitted today. So hope the work can be done soon.
I like this offer. In other projects, I encountered a problem in the reliability of information because people want to check in and get a tick, as said Monopolisto. Such a problem exists.
You offer a good solution to this problem.
You can select specific, competent people who will check the work, or give access to check the work to all coordinators, but in this case, the work should be accepted if it scores more than one positive check in order to eliminate a possible error from the coordinator.
Thanks for your suggestion👍
Try to attend the ru WorkShop. We will be glad to see you at this Friday. The decision has already been made there. It was decided to give access to data verification to all coordinators. The coordinators check the works in their native language, or in a language they are fluent in. Don’t forget that the coordinator is
volunteer.
