search

stacks-archive / app-mining

For App Mining landing page development and App Mining operations.
https://app.co/mining
MIT License
48 stars 16 forks source link

Define Anti-Patterns that might decreases the ranking if used #98

Open friedger opened 5 years ago

friedger commented 5 years ago

What is the problem you are seeing? Please describe. Concerns are raised that

https://github.com/blockstack/app-mining/issues/7#issuecomment-487685611 https://github.com/blockstack/app-mining/issues/70

How is this problem misaligned with goals of app mining? This encourage developers to integrate Blockstack into existing apps that are not, or nearly not visible to the user, hence, not protecting the users' digital rights, not promoting blockstack,..

What is the explicit recommendation you’re looking to propose? Add a factor to the ranking that reflects how much blockstack is used. The factor is determined by Blockstack anti-patterns. These need to be defined, examples could be

Describe your long term considerations in proposing this change. Please include the ways you can predict this recommendation could go wrong and possible ways mitigate.

In a first step, a statement about these anti-patterns can be published by the developers (self-certification) every months on app.co

These certifications could be challenged by users and if the certification was invalid results into penalties for the next month.

Additional context Requires features on app.co

stackatron commented 5 years ago

@friedger like this idea in general, but the specific changes seem like they should just be upgrades to how NIL ranks apps. cc @larrysalibra

friedger commented 5 years ago

My idea here was that these anti-pattern impact the ranking across all reviewers

On Tue, 30 Apr 2019, 17:35 Jeff Domke, notifications@github.com wrote:

@friedger https://github.com/friedger like this idea in general, but the specific changes seem like they should just be upgrades to how NIL ranks apps. cc @larrysalibra https://github.com/larrysalibra

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/blockstack/app-mining/issues/98#issuecomment-488001149, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AALBYWI7AUZZVMRAUGCNSDLPTBRL7ANCNFSM4HJJ4WXQ .

larrysalibra commented 5 years ago

My idea here was that these anti-pattern impact the ranking across all reviewers

How would this apply to all reviewers? I'm not sure i understand the certification process.

friedger commented 5 years ago

If an app uses 2 anti-patterns then the final score (after taking last month result into account) is reduced by e.g. 2 x 0.2 score points.

The certification process is self certification. Every month, the app publisher has to confirm which anti-pattern they use or not use. There could be some kind of review process (juridiction) for case where there were false self-certificates.

friedger commented 5 years ago

Proposal for anti-pattern "Using firebase SDK" penality -0.5 on the final score

friedger commented 5 years ago

Proposal for anti-pattern "Share private app key outside of the client side of the app" -> ineligible in NIL as stated in #150

friedger commented 5 years ago

Proposal for anti-pattern "Send plain data to server, then encrypt data on the server" -> ineligible in NIL as stated in #150