The idea sounds good. But, especially when it comes to politics or controversial topics, allowing people to rate them can simply be used to target and tear down/discredit an author. I just think certain aspects of this can be dangerous if leveraged the wrong way. Especially since you are brining in Google and their search results/algorithm on this.
Articles should be judged on the content, not the author. Also, what would you do about those who wish to remain anonymous? Would participation be required as well?
I don't know, I just see too many red flags with this and too many things that can go wrong if a person or group of people don't agree with you or don't like what you're doing.
Yes i believe you are right, but i see this from another perspective, take for example googleplay store, i believe such scenario as you mentioned must exist, yet its on the low.
My idea does not include users being able to flag authors and visitors being able to directly rate the authors is only one of the criteria for determining the overall rating, so i believe with that issues of politics will be on the low.
Plus, for every every controversial issue or politics there will always be supporters
I've seen it happen quite a few times with the rating system on the Play Store and iOS App Store. Perhaps having some kind of reputation algorithm would be a better way to show an authors rating. Formulating their likes, comments, posts, etc. into an algorithm that dynamically generates an author rating. I personally think that would be a better idea.
Maybe include a rating system as well that has a very minor affect in the algorithm, or no effect at all. That way it would just serve as an additional rating to the algorithmic one.
That's a great idea
Thank you!