you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Never heard of a "graph database" before. This sounds like it may be perfect to drive my MetaVote™ concept that would replace/integrate votes, subs, metatags, emojis, status, ranking, etc etc etc.

Is "bridging" a real term? I just made it up for lack of a better term.

I don't know enough about databases or A.I. to know which should be employed for this, but I would expect that natural divisions and echo chambers would evolve, whether it's the left vs right, trolls or shills or bots vs others, or whatever - I would hope that if these relationships could be openly analyzed and the relationships exposed I might hope that developed tools and people might be able to sort it out, root out infiltrators, and have their preferences and statistics protect them. Especially with MetaVote™.

MetaVote™ could bring in VASTLY more qualitative information regarding users habits - information that's hidden from us all. I would LOVE to have all the statistics be completely open and transparent as a whole, yet have individuals stats be private except available only to them. We should have control of our own info and profiles - not the Technocracy.

With this open information and relationships we could see the swarms including the inevitable shills. Any shills that build up "authenticity" and trust will have to behave properly - thus doing no damage. When they activate they'll be sorted with among like minds and thus expose themselves through their patterns of behaviour. SaidIt may have pattern recognition that I'm unaware of, but it's certainly not open, nor can it be very complex with only 2 votes.

Because they're exposed their money and numbers can't save them.

Love the token ideas. One of my pitch proposals is for a community-based webstore. I don't even have a moderatly catchy working-title for it yet. Not just for SaidIt but it might include WikiSpooks, content creators, and users. I've already seen content creators team up with their stores and it might be wonderful to have a federation of cooperating stores that aren't just determined to only make a profit so much as bring awareness and options. In addition to your great ideas, I think 3D printing, CNC machining, DIY, etc. I hadn't thought of it as a classifieds/Craigslist/Kijiji thing but I suppose that might be good too.

IMO, just as the forum content would be separate from the MetaVote™ that would organize it, I would expect that the tokens would be in a separate module, and further removed the store would be on a different website with bridging to it like WikiSpooks and PeerTube sites - separate but bridged.

For my MetaVote™ concept, regarding each post and comment, I would have 2 categories. On the left would be a content qualitative assessment with dozens (or hundreds) of options rather that just 2 vote options - but you only get a single click. On the right would be a content topical assessment with the same special GUI offering dozens (or hundreds) of options, like metatags and/or subs - with numerous clicks to better categorize the content. There's MUCH more to this categorizing side and GUI too, including another concept already in wide use, yet not on forums.

Importantly the MetaVote™ concept and GUI could be applied to MANY other aspects of this forum (including your preferences, "tribes"/viewpoints, subs, friends, sets, faves, authors/creators/sources, dates, etc) and applications beyond.

I would LOVE for people to be rewarded for curating content and organizing everything. Pattern recognition would be critical here to separate the shills from others, and just as people could choose what topics (like subs) they wish to view, they could also choose to turn on/off certain topics and patterns. Imagine a toggle switch to see what everyone thought to seeing what people "like me" thought - and then comparing. You could then see the divisions, comparable to Amazon ratings with extreme love/hate sometimes or other "normal" spreads or clear opinions on the qualities and topics.

Yes, "library" is a great term and analogy. I should employ it. IMO librarians would not be necessary as the pattern divisions should distinguish the "good" from others (a simplistic description of complexity) and with decentralized sites and owners' trusted teams (as I've outlined elsewhere) the unwanted could be marginalized (or even ejected) to promote quality content. "Librarian category organizers" or GUI template makers could also present their best efforts to be used by the many.

I also have a specific simple GUI idea about how to "correct" topic labels which ties into the pattern divisions.

Viewpoints is part of the "topics" side if you mean labeling the type of political content or whatever. I'll have to show you for it to make sense. Plus there are many variations and combinations on my ideas to be narrowed down - or maybe include them all and let the users set their own GUI preferences.

I need sleep so consider this rambling potential for a rough draft of something. I know I was often vague and kept many things mysterious. The simplicity is in the GUI.

[–]zyxzevn 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Librarians are analysts or information collectors

Everyone can be a librarians. The idea is that they keep track of information and order it.
I realize that the concept of a librarian is much more complex.

Almost all people are shifting information around, and not really adding new information.
How many people are really witnesses themselves?
And how many are changing/selecting the information to push their own opinion/agenda.

A lot of people are analyzing the information (like James Corbett). Most people are not so good at it. I think I should look better at the different roles.

What about crazy people?

I have now a FlatEarther posting nonsense to me.
Out of context.(It is called forum sliding).
Where do I place him?
Personally I think that he is a troll/agent, but you never know.

In similar sense we have: Qanon sheep, Antifa-fascists,
NeoNazi-Trolls, Men pretending to be female, activists, etc.


With viewpoints, I mean that you have some assertions in one viewpoint that you keep in the articles or replies.
People often have ideas that are hard to talk about, like religious dogmas or scientism blindness.
So instead of letting them discuss with each other, I thought it would be nice to have them each build their own logical basis.
And you can add replies or questions "in the viewpoint" of the original poster.
(Or add a different viewpoint in a different branch.)

The idea is that people can have discussions within their own logic system.
And can switch from one logic system to the other.

If a person's logic system becomes too complex or too weird, the person can change his mind. And go for a better logic system.
My idea is that people can go from dogmatic to a bit more open minded.