4 ms·
It's so predictable that it's frustrating to see people who should know better falling for it. Of course it's a fresh feel without the trolls. It's not open to
by neltnerb 3y ago
It's so predictable that it's frustrating to see people who should know better falling for it. Of course it's a fresh feel without the trolls. It's not open to all yet, so of course it is.
I don't know why they expect it to turn out any differently, it's hard to take this tool seriously.
Facebook was fresh once too. It was invite only for elite universities so everyone had roughly the same expectations for where lines were (they were not in acceptable places, but homogeneity helps with that).
- mahathu 3y agoHow about using a tree-like structure to track who invited whom to the platform. Offer a generous yet limited number of invites to users, potentially adjusting this amount based on their positive interactions within the network. Permanently ban accounts that violate the rules, and if the new accounts a user invites keep getting banned (automatically) investigate whether that user is using multiple accounts, which would also be against the rules. I'm sure deciding where to draw the line and clearly defining rules, and then enforcing them is a complex task (same as in public policy or international relations) inherent to any social network, and it is unlikely that an optimal solution exists considering the difference of opinions. However, could this type of rule help mitigate the issues mentioned?
- morkalork 3y agoIt's funny to see people advocate for a classist system of nobility hundreds of years later. Please, tell us more about how you'd like to restrict a social network to those who are, as they say, "well bred".
- gfodor 3y agoThey expect it to turn out differently because they’re building something in the style of how the web was built.
- ed25519FUUU 3y agoTechnology has changed a lot. Have people changed?