5 ms·
It strikes me that a logical step to prevent #2 is "allow only new contributing members that have been vouched for by n old members". Yes, I'm that elitist. An
by groby_b 16y ago
It strikes me that a logical step to prevent #2 is "allow only new contributing members that have been vouched for by n old members".
Yes, I'm that elitist. And yes, I'm well aware I probably wouldn't get voted in :)
But here's the other part - keep the site open for reading. That means it (hopefully) self-selects for quality, and other people can observe a high-quality discussion.
- mkr-hn 16y agoDo you have any examples of a site where treehousing has improved things?
- rapicastillo 16y agoApple comes to mind, app-wise.
- mkr-hn 16y agoI was thinking in terms of communities.
- steveklabnik 16y agoMetafilter is often cited. They have a $5 fee for accounts. Then again, Something Awful is $10...
- mkr-hn 16y agoThat's clubhousing, not treehousing. Treehousing would be putting social barriers on entry. Clubhousing would be financial. These terms are 100% arbitrary and invented an hour ago, but these seem like good definitions.
- steveklabnik 16y agoDribbble, then.
- mkr-hn 16y agoIt'll be interesting to see how that model holds up to another 2-3 years. The few invite-based communities I've been a part of started to degrade as the social graph grew out and started to pick up the occasional undesirable. It was harder to get rid of them because they knew someone who knew someone, and trying to push them out had a network effect. It might be obvious to someone removed by 3+ levels that a bad element is bad, but the person who invited them might not see it.
- jacques_chester 16y agoAdvogato investigated the problem of transitive trust networks pretty thoroughly as I recall. Anyone here able to comment on how they turned out?
- groby_b 16y agoI am seriously considering pruning branches, not just leaves of the social graph to keep communities healthy. I.e. if you invited a bunch of bad apples, you will be pruned too. I have no idea if it would work, but it's pretty obvious that open social graphs beyond a certain threshold are not conducive to high-level discussions.
- eps 16y agoThere is a story making rounds about hiring policies of Saint-Petersburg Mint (back in Royal Russia times). Every new hire not only needed three recommendations from current employees, but that should the new person ever get fired, those who recommended him would be let go as well. Brutal, but brilliant... even if it is not necessary true :)
- allwein 16y agoI assume, of course, that this process wasn't fully recursive, lest the entire mint be fired for one unfortunate hire.
- groby_b 16y agoEven then - it's only going UP the tree, not traversing down again to the siblings :)
- xiongchiamiov 16y agoThis is similar to how many private BitTorrent trackers work. If someone you invited gets banned, so do you.
- waqf 16y agoBut here's the other, other part: keep the site open for writing as well, but make the non-elites' contributions only visible when you are logged in as a non-elite. Then the elites can continue their excellent discussions unhindered, and any passing stranger can browse the elite discussions: yet everyone can have their say in the agora.