Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.
Democracy, personalisation and Reputation Managers
Author: Robert Cumming Posted: 11/1/1999; 7:43:53 AM Topic: Democracy, personalisation and Reputation Managers Msg #: 12574 Prev/Next: 12573 / 12575
Some thoughts about reputation management, karma and suchlike...
I've been to Epinions a few times now and been a bit underwhelmed with what I've seen. Sure, the idea is a neat one, and the site's democratic aims are laudable, but there's a problem: I don't agree with the concensus on who's a good reviewer and who's not.
I've noticed a similar problem reading Slashdot: I don't always agree with the moderators' scoring, even if it's much better than no scoring at all.
I want reputation management to be in my hands, not in the hands of the masses. I can do this when reading Usenet with Lars Ingebrigtsen's Gnus - I score up the people and topics I want to read, and I score down people and topics I can't suffer. Why can't I do this on Slashdot, Epinions, Scripting News, or any of the web boards?
The web has got to be able to handle diversity of opinion, not just democracy.
There are responses to this message:
- Intentional Online Communities, Dave Winer, 11/1/1999; 7:59:43 AM
- Re: Democracy, personalisation and Reputation Managers, Seth Gordon, 11/1/1999; 8:11:31 AM
- Re: Democracy, personalisation and Reputation Managers, Wesley Felter, 11/1/1999; 6:13:25 PM
This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:53:17 PM.
© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.