|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
The Blueberry Hill
Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Location: The otherwise central zone.
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:50 pm |
  |
|
FUCK OFF
_________________
MYSTERY ADVENTURE START.. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
 |
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:51 pm |
|
|
my point is sarcastically that there aren't as many millions as you think, but also that they made an open source way to read doc files do that normal humans wouldn't have to listen to trolls like you whine about it.
Also, you are the one picking the fights to start with, so yeah. God that feels very first grade, but hopefully you get what i am saying.
EDIT: Agreeing with Blueberry. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
Intentionally Wrong
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:54 pm |
|
|
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
| != wrote: |
http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html
'' A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy. '' |
A great link, relevant, which I have now bookmarked. If we had a karma system I T F, I'd give you karma for that. |
Guys! Did anybody else read this? Just ignore BenoitRen if he's bothering you. Read this instead!
_________________
JSNLV is frequently and intentionally wrong. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:55 pm |
|
|
| I opened it in another tab but didnt get to the reading part. I will do this at some point. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
The Blueberry Hill
Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Location: The otherwise central zone.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 5:11 pm |
|
|
| boojiboy7 wrote: |
| I opened it in another tab but didnt get to the reading part. I will do this at some point. |
_________________
MYSTERY ADVENTURE START.. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
Intentionally Wrong
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 5:28 pm |
|
|
Okay, I see how it is. Reading is hard. Here, I'll quote (what I feel is) the most important parts:
| A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy (as abridged by me) wrote: |
Three Things to Accept
1.) Of the things you have to accept, the first is that you cannot completely separate technical and social issues. This doesn't work. It's never been stated more clearly than in the pair of documents called "LambdaMOO Takes a New Direction." I can do no better than to point you to those documents.
The group is real. It will exhibit emergent effects. It can't be ignored, and it can't be programmed, which means you have an ongoing issue. And the best pattern, or at least the pattern that's worked the most often, is to put into the hands of the group itself the responsibility for defining what value is, and defending that value, rather than trying to ascribe those things in the software upfront.
2.) The second thing you have to accept: Members are different than users. A pattern will arise in which there is some group of users that cares more than average about the integrity and success of the group as a whole. And that becomes your core group, Art Kleiner's phrase for "the group within the group that matters most."
Now, the software does not always allow the core group to express itself, which is why I say you have to accept this. Because if the software doesn't allow the core group to express itself, it will invent new ways of doing so.
3.) The third thing you need to accept: The core group has rights that trump individual rights in some situations. This pulls against the libertarian view that's quite common on the network, and it absolutely pulls against the one person/one vote notion. But you can see examples of how bad an idea voting is when citizenship is the same as ability to log in.
Imagine today if, in the United States, Internet users had to be polled before any anti-war group could be created. Or French users had to be polled before any pro-war group could be created. The people who want to have those discussions are the people who matter. And absolute citizenship, with the idea that if you can log in, you are a citizen, is a harmful pattern, because it is the tyranny of the majority.
So the core group needs ways to defend itself -- both in getting started and because of the effects I talked about earlier -- the core group needs to defend itself so that it can stay on its sophisticated goals and away from its basic instincts.
Now, when I say these are three things you have to accept, I mean you have to accept them. Because if you don't accept them upfront, they'll happen to you anyway. And then you'll end up writing one of those documents that says "Oh, we launched this and we tried it, and then the users came along and did all these weird things. And now we're documenting it so future ages won't make this mistake." Even though you didn't read the thing that was written in 1978.
Four Things to Design For
1.) If you were going to build a piece of social software to support large and long-lived groups, what would you design for? The first thing you would design for is handles the user can invest in.
The world's best reputation management system is right here, in the brain. And actually, it's right here, in the back, in the emotional part of the brain. Almost all the work being done on reputation systems today is either trivial or useless or both, because reputations aren't linearizable, and they're not portable.
Users have to be able to identify themselves and there has to be a penalty for switching handles. The penalty for switching doesn't have to be total. But if I change my handle on the system, I have to lose some kind of reputation or some kind of context. This keeps the system functioning.
2.) Second, you have to design a way for there to be members in good standing. Have to design some way in which good works get recognized. The minimal way is, posts appear with identity. You can do more sophisticated things like having formal karma or "member since."
I'm on the fence about whether or not this is a design or accepting. Because in a way I think members in good standing will rise. But more and more of the systems I'm seeing launching these days are having some kind of additional accretion so you can tell how much involvement members have with the system.
3.) Three, you need barriers to participation. This is one of the things that killed Usenet. You have to have some cost to either join or participate, if not at the lowest level, then at higher levels. There needs to be some kind of segmentation of capabilities.
Now, the segmentation can be total -- you're in or you're out, as with the music group I just listed. Or it can be partial -- anyone can read Slashdot, anonymous cowards can post, non-anonymous cowards can post with a higher rating. But to moderate, you really have to have been around for a while.
It has to be hard to do at least some things on the system for some users, or the core group will not have the tools that they need to defend themselves.
The user of social software is the group, and ease of use should be for the group. If the ease of use is only calculated from the user's point of view, it will be difficult to defend the group from the "group is its own worst enemy" style attacks from within.
4.) And, finally, you have to find a way to spare the group from scale. Scale alone kills conversations, because conversations require dense two-way conversations. In conversational contexts, Metcalfe's law is a drag. The fact that the amount of two-way connections you have to support goes up with the square of the users means that the density of conversation falls off very fast as the system scales even a little bit. You have to have some way to let users hang onto the less is more pattern, in order to keep associated with one another.
You have to find some way to protect your own users from scale. This doesn't mean the scale of the whole system can't grow. But you can't try to make the system large by taking individual conversations and blowing them up like a balloon; human interaction, many to many interaction, doesn't blow up like a balloon. It either dissipates, or turns into broadcast, or collapses. So plan for dealing with scale in advance, because it's going to happen anyway. |
This abridgment leaves out all the entertaining and instructive examples that made the original document such a joy to read, so if you find yourself at all intrigued by this, go back to the original link and read the full version.
_________________
JSNLV is frequently and intentionally wrong. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
Agent Orange
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 5:49 pm |
|
|
I wanted to post this in the "arcade culture" thread.
Seems like you beat me to it.
Well, it fits better in here than in there anyways. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
showka
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 6:16 pm |
|
|
| Gouki wrote: |
| Uh, I was wondering if there was a way to view the Destructive Threads, that destroyed the forum? I mean, I can see why they wouldn't be included in the archive, but I'd like to read them again. |
I remember during the legendary TGQ exodus thread Hot Stott Bot mentioned he'd done a wget right before the end. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
Gouki
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Location: Australia.
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 3:35 am |
|
|
| showka wrote: |
| Gouki wrote: |
| Uh, I was wondering if there was a way to view the Destructive Threads, that destroyed the forum? I mean, I can see why they wouldn't be included in the archive, but I'd like to read them again. |
I remember during the legendary TGQ exodus thread Hot Stott Bot mentioned he'd done a wget right before the end. |
Yeah, I asked for a copy of them when he was offering. But I never ended up getting one.
_________________
... Maybe later. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
showka
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 2:57 pm |
|
|
| Me too. |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
Internetics
Joined: 19 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:36 am |
|
|
| Sir Toups wrote: |
| Maz and Botoggles have been made moderators of general and kop, due to recent goings-on as well as my personal life becoming busier. |
Do I detect a lady friend in the picture?
Don't leave a brother hangin'
_________________
"Is Father's Day nine months after Mother's Day, or is it the other way around?" |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
Hot Stott Bot
banned
Joined: 05 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 2:42 am |
|
|
| Wait, what, you're back! |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
Internetics
Joined: 19 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 3:09 am |
|
|
Yeah. I was on holiday. People still take those in the summertime, you know.
| Pikachu wrote: |
| If it is in the interests of the community, I will be glad to answer any and all questions regarding my relationship with Toups, so help me God. |
I am now formulating a new theory... In involes Toups and another person... A man! For this I will need to consult the greatest Pokemon slash writers to halp me piece the rest of the story together. Stay tuned!
(Mr. Toups, I sent you a PM. It's quite not safe for work, if you catch my drift)
_________________
"Is Father's Day nine months after Mother's Day, or is it the other way around?" |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
falsedan
Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Location: San Francisco
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 10, 2007 10:57 am |
|
|
internetics you are an internet e-sleuth
wb
_________________
 |
|
| Filter / Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
