Probably, each of us has a lot of small improvements that we would like to see on our favorite subject resource. A significant number of such proposals, controversial and not very, was posted in a specially created repository on github (see also the post limonte , dedicated to this). For small things, this approach is good (although, apparently, the patient is more likely dead than alive). I have a really great offer.

Collaboration articles

Why is it necessary

The quality of many publications on Habré is not inferior to the best examples of specialized literature in Russian. Quite often, when preparing large materials, there is a tempting opportunity to join forces.

You can joke a lot on ... hmm ... attention to karma. But still Habr rests on the reputation of community members, which to some extent reflect the karma and rating. All karmic dividends should not fall only to the first author. It seems to me that it is quite possible to set up the system in such a way that the authors of the post could indicate in what proportion they should be responsible for the writing. For example, in the case of three authors: 0.7A + 0.2B + 0.1C. Accordingly, the rating will be distributed in the specified proportions.

Underwater rocks

Of course, such an innovation can lead to some abuse, which can be prevented to a certain extent by restrictions. I see the following points.

Number of collaborators . The academic world has long been faced with the problem of an unlimited increase in the number of co-authors in scientific publications. I think on Habré the number of co-authors can be limited at some acceptable low level - for example, 5.

Bleeding accounts through collaboration . The question is how problematic it is. But you can imagine that for some non-illusory interest one of the old-timers decided to co-author one of the newbies. You can secure yourself by entering a reasonable minimum threshold of karma, from which the co-authorship feature becomes available - for example, 10 or 20.

...

There are probably other difficulties.

Let's discuss whether it is worth it.

UPD 2017-04-04 15:45 . I really ask those who answer "no" in the survey to comment on why, in your opinion, this is a bad idea.