What concerns me about this plan is that the metrics and analyses being proposed seem (largely) designed to increase engagement with the questions, rather than improving the quality of the content as a source of knowledge.

Since algorithms are trained to based on measurable outputs, it's not hard to imagine that such an algorithm will tend toward suggesting "click-baity" titles that users accept without modification, rather than titles that really distill the meat of the question down into a useful one-line summary.

That said, I like the tool as shown in parts 1 and 2. I would feel reassured to see more emphasis on designing (or emphasizing) metrics that focus on quality, rather than engagement.

What concerns me about this plan is that the metrics and analyses being proposed seem (largely) designed to increase engagement with the questions, rather than improving the quality of the content as a source of knowledge.

Since algorithms are trained to optimize measurable outputs, it's not hard to imagine that such an algorithm will tend toward suggesting "click-baity" titles that users accept without modification, rather than titles that really distill the meat of the question down into a useful one-line summary.

That said, I like the tool as shown in parts 1 and 2. I would feel reassured to see more emphasis on designing (or emphasizing) metrics that focus on quality, rather than engagement.

What concerns me about this plan is that it the metrics and analyses being proposed are designed to increase engagement with the questions, rather than improving the quality of the content as a source of knowledge.

Since algorithms are trained to based on measurable outputs, it's not hard to imagine that such an algorithm will tend toward suggesting "click-baity" titles that users accept without modification, rather than titles that really distill the meat of the question down into a useful one-line summary.

What concerns me about this plan is that the metrics and analyses being proposed seem (largely) designed to increase engagement with the questions, rather than improving the quality of the content as a source of knowledge.

Since algorithms are trained to based on measurable outputs, it's not hard to imagine that such an algorithm will tend toward suggesting "click-baity" titles that users accept without modification, rather than titles that really distill the meat of the question down into a useful one-line summary.

That said, I like the tool as shown in parts 1 and 2. I would feel reassured to see more emphasis on designing (or emphasizing) metrics that focus on quality, rather than engagement.