<pre>

Path: news.mathworks.com!not-for-mail
From: &quot;Ned Gulley&quot; &lt;gulley@mathworks.com&gt;
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: What is the model for the File Exchange?
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 17:48:01 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: The MathWorks Inc
Lines: 16
Message-ID: &lt;gr2toh$n4k$1@fred.mathworks.com&gt;
Reply-To: &quot;Ned Gulley&quot; &lt;gulley@mathworks.com&gt;
NNTP-Posting-Host: webapp-03-blr.mathworks.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=&quot;ISO-8859-1&quot;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fred.mathworks.com 1238694481 23700 172.30.248.38 (2 Apr 2009 17:48:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@mathworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 17:48:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: MATLAB Central Newsreader 140947
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:529815


Broadly speaking, there are two ways of thinking about a content distribution site like the File Exchange. It can be exclusive, with inbound filters that block access to all but the best content. Anyone who downloads content from such a site can, in theory, be assured of its worth. The other model is to make the site inclusive, so that very little content is filtered on the way in, but then filters can applied on the way out. These outbound filters, if well made, can also provide some assurance of quality content.

We might call these two models filter-then-publish (exclusive) and publish-then-filter (inclusive).

If you strongly believe in the exclusive filter-then-publish model, it can be disheartening to find bad content of any kind anywhere on the site. It is an unwelcome intrusion. But if you believe in a publish-then-filter approach, it becomes less contentious whether or not any given file meets your particular standards of excellence. You can think of the growing content as valuable ore to be mined.

To make these scenarios more concrete, a refereed journal is exclusive, and a photo-sharing site like Flickr or Picasa is inclusive. My snapshots may not be interesting to you, but they are probably interesting somebody out there.

The exclusive refereed model is appealing, but the filtering process is time-consuming. Beyond this, there is the problem of the definition of excellence. Who is to decide? How is this group of judges chosen? Everyone has their own standards for excellence that vary along the dimensions of utility, algorithmic quality, coding standards, and domain knowledge. Whose standards will be enshrined for all to abide by? Can any standard be consistently applied?

For these reasons, we believe it's appropriate and important to move the File Exchange in the direction of inclusivity with outbound filters. That doesn't mean we think everything is perfect now. We believe that there is a lot we can do to improve the filtering so that you don't see files that you don't care to see. But we believe that there is room enough for everyone to contribute, so long as the code runs, is not malicious, and is offered in good faith. The tent is big, and civility matters. By working with, rather than rejecting outright, the work of naive newcomers, we can help them grow into pillars of this community. Keep in mind the people behind the code. We all started somewhere, and everyone is on their own trajectory of learning.

Help us design an interface that make the use of the site more pleasant. Tell us your preferred mental model of the File Exchange. But please try to recognize there is room enough for many kinds of contributions.

Ned Gulley
MATLAB Central Team
<pre>