Rumours are pretty useless unless accuracy of past predictions is known

[johnsterdam]

If the point of the site is just to report any rumour, fair enough.

But if the idea is to be informative, would it be possible to give a score to every prediction, based on the accuracy of past predictions of that source? How to score each past prediction would need a little thought (perhaps something like how accurate was it in content terms, and in terms of release timing). And then each one would need to be scored. Perhaps too much work, but perhaps it could be automated if predictions are coded in some way.

It just seems pointless to be hearing things like 'M2 iMac not likely this year' - that's just meaningless without a sense of how reliable the source has been in the past.

 

[icanhazmac]

If the point of the site is just to report any rumour, fair enough.

But if the idea is to be informative, would it be possible to give a score to every prediction, based on the accuracy of past predictions of that source? How to score each past prediction would need a little thought (perhaps something like how accurate was it in content terms, and in terms of release timing). And then each one would need to be scored. Perhaps too much work, but perhaps it could be automated if predictions are coded in some way.

It just seems pointless to be hearing things like 'M2 iMac not likely this year' - that's just meaningless without a sense of how reliable the source has been in the past.

I think a large part of the "fun" of rumors would be diminished if MR had to include a source scorecard for every source in every article.

 

[fatTribble]

There are often articles before an iPhone release that go through just about every feature ever rumored. For each feature they discuss how likely it is that we‘ll see that feature. To me this far out it’s just fun to read about all the various thoughts that are flying around. Even if you give something a very high score because of the reliability of the source, it still doesn’t mean it will happen.