I would argue that we -did- get this, and where it was implemented it is almost universally terrible. For example the comments section on any blog or video. Mo

I would argue that we -did- get this, and where it was implemented it is almost universally terrible. For example the comments section on any blog or video. Most of it is bland, chunks of it are spam. Example 2 are the services that explicitly all people to write content. Facebook, Twitter etc. It's a giant mess of mostly-terrible content. In some cases created with the explicit intention to cause harm. Wikipedia is the opposite, mostly good, but largely because an enormous community spends countless hours undoing the work of bad actors, and effectively censoring most bad behaviour. That the Web does not live up to some ideal is not the fault of Netscape or Mosaic. It's not the fault of Facebook. It's the fault of the people using the Web. It turns out there are plenty of us, willing to spew out mindless opinions (including this one) all night long. Prior to the endless September it was possible to "educate" folk to the etiquette of the internet. But that education had a really narrow target market, and didn't scale. Once Joe Public arrived there was no way to "educate", nor was it desirable to do so. People are people. Don't blame the Web. Blame the people using it. (And, anecdotally, if early users had had the opportunity to edit my Web pages, that "feature" would have been turned off almost instantly.)