|
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Previous topic
|
Next topic
|
|
 Wednesday, February 15, 2006
started 2/15/2006; 6:27:03 PM - last post 2/16/2006; 11:36:37 PM
|
|
Doc Searls - Wednesday, February 15, 2006 
2/15/2006; 10:27:03 PM (reads: 4066, responses: 4)
|
|
Running the credit 
Keeper
| | Tristan Louis, who started the gatekeeper thread (even though he was overlooked by tech.memeorandum in the midst), has posted a follow-up. He's learned a lot, as have we all. |
Widening the open spaces
| | Add a link to Memorandum or Technorati or Digg that says something like "Click here for fresh voices on this topic". An algorithm could sort the data using something like a Pareto Principle for blogs, so you can have a "20" View for the most-read bloggers, and an "80 view for the rest. |
| | Come to think of it, building on Mike Warot's idea, there are probably a hundred views that I can think of that I'd like - perhaps aggregators could open up their data and algorithms, so that readers could be allowed to make out own views? Digg does this a bit, but just aggregates based on vote, and doesn't provide the views. The data are already there, arranged by hierarchy for bloggers and tags for topics, so I can't imagine it would be that hard.... |
Me too. Except for the Geneva part.
| | I'm afraid I'll be the Admiral James Stockdale of Internet Governance. But here's why I'll be in Geneva: the Internet is my home. It's the same reason property owners go to town council meetings. I'm a citizen, concerned about what my local government and neighbors might do to the place where I live. |
Drink your own news river
| | Ever struggled in vain to both track your own conversation and hear the other ones around you too? RSS lets you do that without looking like a fop. Even better, it lets you listen to every conversation ... everywhere. |
| | Doc likens it to drinking from a firehose, only you get to make your own firehose. I'd suggest it¹s more like drinking from the municipal supply, only you get to pick your watershed. |
| | By the way, Jememy's post came from a river fed by the stream formed by a subscription to a keyword search for RSS and conversation. Not from going to any "gatekeepers". |
Getting down with what's up
| | We need to come together to figure out how to ensure that these companies and their technologies are indeed a force for greater democratic participation, not pushing against it. These companies should be, and can be, the darlings of the human rights community for what they can do for human rights in places like China. It doesn¹t happen to be the case today, but I have no doubt that we can get to that point through collaboration that is grounded in honesty, openness, transparency, and a commitment to bedrock democratic values. |
'Rise up
If not dollars
| | Stowe Boyd: Filling the Disclosure Gap. By which he shares an HTML table: eight columns, any number of rows, some of which are broken into up to three checkboxes indicating past/present/future, formal/informal, consulting/advisory, consensual/forced, forgotten/remembered, failed/successful, unlikely/probable/certain... forms of relationship, or whatever. Being HTML, it's up to you, right? DIY city. |
| | Check it out, see if it makes sense. |
discuss
|
|
Mike Warot - Fresh Voices
2/16/2006; 10:39:45 AM (reads: 1161, responses: 3)
|
|
|
What if we could give the readers a voice? I imagine a FireFox plugin which would allow Technorati Tags to be added by readers instead of the authors of a given posting.
I believe that the even longer tail is the audience... if you could enable them to participate actively, then Web 2.0 would be an even richer and useful experience for all of us.
Allowing us to add tags to existing stuff opens new fields of possibilities.
--Mike--
discuss
|
|
Julian Bond - Re: Fresh Voices
2/16/2006; 2:01:31 PM (reads: 697, responses: 2)
|
|
|
Isn't that more or less what Digg does? And/or what del.icio.us does?
And the question is what's the immediate payback for the reader? Because without the payback, people won't do it.
discuss
|
|
Mike Warot - Re: Fresh Voices
2/16/2006; 8:25:03 PM (reads: 807, responses: 1)
|
|
|
Digg essentially uses an aggregate of members bookmarks to build a new feed. Like Doc's drinking from a firehose, it helps build a new, more interesting stream, out of the aggregate.
What I'm thinking is to build an infrastructure that helps capture a new data point. Instead of getting lists of things people want to possibly visit again (which is what bookmarks are), why not allow capture of the impression of a page right after it's been read.
The existing Tagging model of Technorati only allows the author to decide where something belongs. In my relations with Doc, I've othen had him pick up on something I didn't quite see when I was writing, because he's got other things going on in his head, and different threads to connect to the text.
These new connections can't be captured from the author of a piece, because they aren't there. These new connections only happen in the mind of the reader... if we give them tools to actively add value to existing stuff (aka Content)... we get new connections, and more efficient use of all of our creative efforts.
If we keep Identity tied to the reader, a new type of reputation can be built. It'll also give us a means to watch the watchman, if you will, and help cut down on abuse. (For example, Senate staff marking other Senators stuff as boring, untrue, etc...)
I want the fresh voices to have identity. It doesn't have to be tied to a person, just an ID somewhere the person can control. Anonymous systems give an opening to spam, and that needs to be killed.
In summary: The payback can come in many forms
- Reputation
- Personal Productivity
- Helping to kill spam
- Community Building
- An alternative to bookmarks
Does that all make sense, and did I answer the question adequately?
--Mike--
discuss
|
|
Garrick Van Buren - Re: Fresh Voices
2/17/2006; 3:36:37 AM (reads: 787, responses: 0)
|
|
|
I understand how Technorati isn't what you're looking for. To me, it still sounds like del.icio.us does - albeit with an excerpt from the original author.
discuss
|
|
|
Copyright 2009 The Doc Searls Weblog
|
