Panel Discussion: Contributor Leaderboards to Incentivize Good Community Citizenship
summary
Panelists argue that leaderboards work only as part of a broader system combining automated metrics with human review. Tools cited include Stackalytics for OpenStack and Augur for project analytics, plus CHAOSS badging and a DEI badging review pipeline that reviewers staff. Examples: Drupal’s 15‑year marketplace ranking evolves to avoid alphabetic bias and gaming, Hyperledger’s weekly WeChat translation leaderboard proves useful to employers, and simple dashboards require reset rules and contextual interpretation to avoid perverse incentives.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (12)
- 0:00Leaderboards in open source
- 3:55Drupal’s leaderboard history
- 7:11Leaderboard complications and biases
- 10:18Diverse contributions beyond code
- 14:56Metrics and human recognition
- 19:36Leaderboard design intentions
- 24:28Unmeasurable community health
- 33:37Leaderboards and diversity challenges
- 39:51Communicating leaderboard data
- 43:04When leaderboards work
- 46:37Alternative recognition approaches
- 48:44Summary and closing
related talks
23mIncentivizing Good Community Citizenship with Contributor Leaderboards
35mBeyond Code: The Importance of Elevating Non-Code Contributions
26mAre we being inclusive with our community recognitions?
42mEnhancing Open Source Collaboration: From Incentive Programs to Data-Driven Contribu...
41mBuilding and Supporting Open Source Communities Through Metri...
44mHow to Build Amazing Incentives and Rewards Panel
40mContributor Growth Strategies for OSS Projects
43mBuilding and Supporting Open Source Communities Through Metrics