It’s not a consequence of the medium, people, or wild behaviors entering civilized spaces. It is a consequence of Authoritarian Network Modernists analyzing humanity by Seeing Like a Network, in terms of Ideal Users. The 1st example was the Rational Man of market high Modernists
-
-
James Scott’s Seeing Like a State has an exact isomorphism here. Instead of legibilizing broad contexts (like a forest or city), Authoritarian Network Modernists merely legibilize humans into Design Personas and then complain when humans humanhttps://www.ribbonfarm.com/2010/07/26/a-big-little-idea-called-legibility/ …
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
I meant to write a whole post on this and have a draft sitting around, but like so much of my thinking lately, I stop short of publishing the post because of a sense of “why bother, it won’t make any difference”
3 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Tldr: reputation mechanisms can’t stop this effect, only trade-off the vitality of open systems against the governability of closed ones (and a reputation system is a closing/governance mechanism). You accept a shorter, but pleasanter lifespan for the community.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Do purely negative contributions contribute to the vitality of open systems? The going assumption is that with a reputation system one has to either endure malicious content or start out closed depends on there being no solution to the sibyl problem - something worth questioning?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
an end Retweeted an end
an end added,
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Sure. Gazelles are allowed to evolve defenses against lions and intestinal worm parasites. Just don’t pretend all animals are gazelles competing for gazelle klout, or should be.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.