Not too long before the ASCII art, internet memes and posts of "First!" start showing up and doing an even better job of highlighting why things like this will always sound great on paper but fail in execution.
Obama's team apparently didn't realize that if the wisdom of crowds were really prevalent on sites like Digg and Reddit, we'd be looking at President-elect Ron Paul (who was apparently the only person worthy of it if you read Digg for most of 2007 & half of 2008.)
~GeekMommy
Josh
· 12 months ago
What happens if you "bury" the ability to bury?
Erik Jonker
· 12 months ago
Even if the argumentation in this article is valid (and i am too much an amateur in crowdsourcing to be able to judge that) one should not lose sight of the bigger perspective, the president-elect seems to be trying to start a conversation with the public, that should be praised. His team is probable also reading articles like this and hopefully will learn and adapt, in true web2.0 style :-)
kombizz
· 12 months ago
All we have to do, wait & see. Wait & see whether he is able to solve the current problems of the troubled world, Afganistan, Iraq, Congo, South Africa, Palestine? Then we can judge him if he is a REAL COCONUT or not!!
Todd
· 12 months ago
FURST!!1!
Clinton
· 12 months ago
Man, well put. I'm a huge believer in Crowdsourcing but many of the current uses "bury" messages they don't want to deal with and therefore those most plugged in and logged on can shape the message to read how they want the story told or what information gets through and what does not.
They need an algorithm to pick up "flagged" words and sayings, everything else should be fair game ... you can let people vote on it but what if you also tracked and uplifted "Most Voted On" so even if you are voting "No" over and over people still get to see why SO many people are voting "No" on a question. Basically not just agree disagree but was the question intriguing and worth a vote. It balances the scale. You vote no over and over, that question becomes one of the most "answered" ... you avoid the question then the "yes's" have it and it rises through the ranks in the traditional Digg style ...
I think that would work ...
Alex Merced
· 12 months ago
I voted for Ron Paul, and battled the anti-Ron Paulites on Digg often
But as far as Obama, like said before, I'm not gonna judge the guy till I see what his administration does. I disagree with his overall political philosophy but it doesn't mean I won't recognize any good that'll come from his administration, so I'm watching and hoping to be wrong about him, but with what I've heard so... my assumptions have been right.
Welcome to the cycle
Depression II ---> New Deal II ----> World War III
Could've been prevented, oh well
doug
· 12 months ago
Your points are well taken in the post, but it should also be added that there is a creepy cult of personality that surrounds Barack Obama that plays into this thing as well and makes people want to bury negative questions posed to this guy they have placed on a pedestal. I believe this guy is going to disappoint these sycophants, and no need to go into the political reasons why, but from a sociological perspective, I will be interested to see how the "wisdom of the crowd" changes when that happens.
alexander-social media guy
· 12 months ago
Mark,
I also remember seeing a TV show about guessing how many jelly beans were in a jar. The contestants had to write it down on paper and a female accountant at the bank won the contest.
It'll be interesting to see just how and what changes are made to get closer to the 'wisdom of crowds' ideal.
Alexander
D.D.
· 12 months ago
First of all, your whole bit here is built upon the assumption that Obama's team and the folks at Digg are really concerned about capturing the "wisdom of crowds". It's more likely that Rose and Obama's teams are concerned about allowing folks a forum, a place where they can satisfy their need to be heard, feel like they are part of something bigger--a more popular website, a popular administration or a social media movement.
The little guy loves to be heard, especially when he thinks the big guy might be listening. If I'm Obama's team, I'm concerned about recapturing and sustaining the we're-all-in-this-together/grassroots feeling my supporters had on the campaign trail. Since President-Elect/soon-to-be-President Obama won't be as accessible as he once was, and since most folks will not have the experience or connections to be part of his administration, there are few options/opportunities to allow regular folks to hold court with the President.
Many of Obama's supporters participated in his campaign via the Web, so it makes sense that he would use a Web 2.0 tool to fan the flames of political participation. As to his choice of tool--the forum--it's makes sense because it doesn't necessarily require a moderator or an official blogger; a forum would allow interested folks to talk amongst themselves and to decide what they'd like to talk to about. The key here is that Obama supporters demonstrated their love of airing their opinions during the campaign. His team simply gave folks more of what they love.
The voting/flagging feature is not unlike any others I've seen on other forums. The idea is that "the people" should decide what they want to talk about. The people have decided that they don't want to talk about Blagojevich or campaign finance or corruption. Is that wise? Maybe.
Mike Schinkel
· 12 months ago
Thinking a betting-style prediction market would work better than Digg-style for finding wisdom of crowds. Bets for bragging rights alone.
All Comments
Obama's team apparently didn't realize that if the wisdom of crowds were really prevalent on sites like Digg and Reddit, we'd be looking at President-elect Ron Paul (who was apparently the only person worthy of it if you read Digg for most of 2007 & half of 2008.)
~GeekMommy
Wait & see whether he is able to solve the current problems of the troubled world, Afganistan, Iraq, Congo, South Africa, Palestine?
Then we can judge him if he is a REAL COCONUT or not!!
They need an algorithm to pick up "flagged" words and sayings, everything else should be fair game ... you can let people vote on it but what if you also tracked and uplifted "Most Voted On" so even if you are voting "No" over and over people still get to see why SO many people are voting "No" on a question. Basically not just agree disagree but was the question intriguing and worth a vote. It balances the scale. You vote no over and over, that question becomes one of the most "answered" ... you avoid the question then the "yes's" have it and it rises through the ranks in the traditional Digg style ...
I think that would work ...
But as far as Obama, like said before, I'm not gonna judge the guy till I see what his administration does. I disagree with his overall political philosophy but it doesn't mean I won't recognize any good that'll come from his administration, so I'm watching and hoping to be wrong about him, but with what I've heard so... my assumptions have been right.
Welcome to the cycle
Depression II ---> New Deal II ----> World War III
Could've been prevented, oh well
I also remember seeing a TV show about guessing how many jelly beans were in a jar. The contestants had to write it down on paper and a female accountant at the bank won the contest.
It'll be interesting to see just how and what changes are made to get closer to the 'wisdom of crowds' ideal.
Alexander
The little guy loves to be heard, especially when he thinks the big guy might be listening. If I'm Obama's team, I'm concerned about recapturing and sustaining the we're-all-in-this-together/grassroots feeling my supporters had on the campaign trail. Since President-Elect/soon-to-be-President Obama won't be as accessible as he once was, and since most folks will not have the experience or connections to be part of his administration, there are few options/opportunities to allow regular folks to hold court with the President.
Many of Obama's supporters participated in his campaign via the Web, so it makes sense that he would use a Web 2.0 tool to fan the flames of political participation. As to his choice of tool--the forum--it's makes sense because it doesn't necessarily require a moderator or an official blogger; a forum would allow interested folks to talk amongst themselves and to decide what they'd like to talk to about. The key here is that Obama supporters demonstrated their love of airing their opinions during the campaign. His team simply gave folks more of what they love.
The voting/flagging feature is not unlike any others I've seen on other forums. The idea is that "the people" should decide what they want to talk about. The people have decided that they don't want to talk about Blagojevich or campaign finance or corruption. Is that wise? Maybe.