|
From: | Quentin Spencer |
Subject: | Re: Lilypond store? |
Date: | Thu, 06 Jul 2006 07:39:53 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) |
Trevor Bača wrote:
On 7/5/06, Stewart Holmes <address@hidden> wrote:> I suggest that you start a discussion thread on mutopia's mailing lists:> If> you have constructive ideas on how to create an archive of high-quality > public domain notes, then I would strongly recommend you to use your ideas> to > improve mutopia; if that's not possible, use mutopia as a base for > creating > such an archive (i.e., fork the mutopia project). Unfortunately I don't really have constructive ideas how to improve it;Well -- and this is a straw-man argument -- there's always the example of SlashDot and other projects with 'community content-filtering'. If the mutopia crew *could*, somehow, establish a system of community review, well then, maybe mutopia could become a repository of really professional-looking stuff. The difficulty, I think, is that it's probably easier to evaluate the wittiness of others' comments (or the relevance of news stories, as on SlashDot) than it is to evaluate the professional-ness of music engraving. So even if mutopia set up some sort of community filtering, it's not clear that the filtering would work. Dunno.
Not that I care too much one way or the other about mutopia, but I do believe community filtering can work if implemented properly, and if there enough people involved who care about it. As a contributor of packages to the Fedora Linux distribution (including a lilypond package), my packages are subjected to a fairly rigorous review process before they are accepted. The process has worked so well that the Core part of the distribution (the part packaged by engineers at Red Hat) has adopted some of the quality control processes used by Fedora Extras (the packages submitted by community members) because Extras was generating better quality work than Core. The same is true of academic journals that require peer review.
I think another question regarding selling scores is how much people would be willing to pay. Obviously the engraving quality must be as good or better than any print edition, but even then, while I might be willing to pay a little, I don't know if it would be enough to make this a viable fundraising method (unless the potential audience is quite large).
Quentin
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |