Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.
Re: Too many editors
Author: Bill Seitz Posted: 10/28/1999; 11:58:45 AM Topic: SalonHerringWiredFool.Com Msg #: 12468 (In response to 12463) Prev/Next: 12467 / 12469
I can understand the Wired situation because you had to worry about your ideas/words being misrepresented.
But this is very different. Your words go out the way you want them to.
What if you didn't reply to everyone who disagreed with you? Are you afraid that a significant number of people who believe that signified your admittance of error? Can't you give them the last word, even if you think it's the wrong word? Why is that?
What if you didn't even read everything? You might still choose to read 80%, but you'd ignore the people who tend to be a thorn in your side. I'd guess there's a relatively small ongoing group there. You could make your own kill file. You wouldn't necessary hide those comments, but you'd put a flag next to them, and decide whether you wanted to deal with it. When looking at the thread hierarchy, you could choose not to read any of that thread if a significant number of messages were red-flagged.
Of course, you would build this so that all readers had that feature available. You'd probably want to build it so that from an individual message the reader could say "this is a stupid message, set a yellow flag for this person", or "this is so stupid set a red flag for this writer (for me)".
This starts to slide toward the epinions web-of-trust.
This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:53:14 PM.
© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.