SaidIt should be seen as an intellectual platform, not as a social media site.

submitted by Aureus from (self.whatever)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Aureus[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I've thought about it, and I actually disagree with your earlier post. Ingroups are important, but not the ingroups you have in mind.

See your own post here, which changed my mind: https://saidit.net/s/whatever/comments/4yjw/saidit_should_be_seen_as_an_intellectual_platform/ilt8

The earlier Internet you describe is an ingroup. But it's not an ingroup based on arbitrary friendships. It's an ingroup based on skill, and in some ways that led to shared views about the world, and higher-quality discussions.

IMO a successful web community has to have an ingroup. If it accepts anyone and everyone, the quality goes down to the lowest common denominator. However, that ingroup should be based on skill, intelligence, or some other kind of merit, rather than just personal ties. It shouldn't be either too inclusive, or too exclusive.

[–]magnora7 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

IMO a successful web community has to have an ingroup. If it accepts anyone and everyone, the quality goes down to the lowest common denominator.

You have a good understanding of how this actually works. It's can't be a free-for-all, or things will quickly go bad, and we have many sites that clearly show this, like voat, poal, and others