Comments on: Branding and Web 2.0 http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/04/branding_and_web_20/ Nerds are for Dorks Sat, 21 Nov 2009 10:14:48 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: AhmedF http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/04/branding_and_web_20/comment-page-1/#comment-27307 AhmedF Sun, 30 Apr 2006 05:22:13 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=2948#comment-27307 Great post. I'm not sure I agree with the wisdom of the crowds - use Digg as an example. Reading over its comments, and even what gets actively promoted to the frontpage, it seems that many people fall into mob-think beahviour, or simply "I don't agree so lets mod them down" behaviour. While the crowd is better suited in fidning gems (instead of a couple editors, you now have thousands of users searching for you), it creates a subsequent problem of the crowd starting to think too alike (eg - all the Apple news that hits the frontpage). Ideally a user would be able to identify a section of the crowd (a crowd within a crowd if you wish) that would reflect what they are interested and what they wish to explore. You may miss out on 10% of what you might have been interested in, but you cut out 50% of what you would not be interested in. There is also the issue that in general, people find it easier to be led than to lead. This in turns churns out the 'elite' which then gain influence over the crowd. But that discussion can be in further time ;) Great post.

I’m not sure I agree with the wisdom of the crowds – use Digg as an example. Reading over its comments, and even what gets actively promoted to the frontpage, it seems that many people fall into mob-think beahviour, or simply “I don’t agree so lets mod them down” behaviour. While the crowd is better suited in fidning gems (instead of a couple editors, you now have thousands of users searching for you), it creates a subsequent problem of the crowd starting to think too alike (eg – all the Apple news that hits the frontpage).

Ideally a user would be able to identify a section of the crowd (a crowd within a crowd if you wish) that would reflect what they are interested and what they wish to explore. You may miss out on 10% of what you might have been interested in, but you cut out 50% of what you would not be interested in.

There is also the issue that in general, people find it easier to be led than to lead. This in turns churns out the ‘elite’ which then gain influence over the crowd. But that discussion can be in further time ;)

]]> By: A Corbett http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/04/branding_and_web_20/comment-page-1/#comment-27306 A Corbett Sun, 30 Apr 2006 03:45:23 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=2948#comment-27306 Great Posts...these new, longer, more analytical, more reflective posts are just what FG needs. Great Posts…these new, longer, more analytical, more reflective posts are just what FG needs.

]]> By: jangelo http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/04/branding_and_web_20/comment-page-1/#comment-27305 jangelo Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:11:48 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=2948#comment-27305 Re consensus, you're right about that, Pete. I've re-read everything and I'd just about strike that "consensus" thing out. What I probably should have meant was that the outcome of the wisdom of crowds would be a consensus of sorts. People won't exactly be talking to each other, but the outcome would be so good it seems as if everything was so well-coordinated and discussed among the individual members. Cheers! Angelo Re consensus, you’re right about that, Pete. I’ve re-read everything and I’d just about strike that “consensus” thing out. What I probably should have meant was that the outcome of the wisdom of crowds would be a consensus of sorts. People won’t exactly be talking to each other, but the outcome would be so good it seems as if everything was so well-coordinated and discussed among the individual members.

Cheers!

Angelo

]]> By: Pete Cashmore http://www.forevergeek.com/2006/04/branding_and_web_20/comment-page-1/#comment-27304 Pete Cashmore Sat, 29 Apr 2006 13:57:09 +0000 http://forevergeek.com/?p=2948#comment-27304 Great post. I dunno if it's geeks so much. They're definitely a part of it, but I'd guess that most of the fans are more mainstream than that - MySpace users, YouTube addicts etc I'd also say that the wisdom of crowds is definitely not about consensus - it's the complete opposite. Consensus is when a group of people discuss an issue and come up with a decision that everyone can tolerate, but no one is truly happy about. The wisdom of crowds is about avoiding discussion altogether - making independent decisions that get aggregated. So I've tried to argue that <a href="http://mashable.com/2006/01/10/digg-and-the-so-called-wisdom-of-mobs/" rel="nofollow">Digg isn't a wisdom of crowds system</a> - it's more of an information cascade, where everyone just follows the herd (as you perfectly describe!). I don't think it's hit or miss exactly - let's not forget the long tail here. But I do agree that you need something really special if you're going to get viral adoption - all these systems favor novel ideas over the humdrum. Personally, I've never bought the gatekeepers argument. The A-listers don't live in a bubble - everyone reads blogs from "less popular" bloggers, so an interesting piece of info can quickly ascend to prominence. Digg, YouTube and other collaborative filtering systems can also deliver interesting news and videos from previously unknown sources - if you're creating quality content, you'll always rise to the top. Great post. I dunno if it’s geeks so much. They’re definitely a part of it, but I’d guess that most of the fans are more mainstream than that – MySpace users, YouTube addicts etc

I’d also say that the wisdom of crowds is definitely not about consensus – it’s the complete opposite. Consensus is when a group of people discuss an issue and come up with a decision that everyone can tolerate, but no one is truly happy about. The wisdom of crowds is about avoiding discussion altogether – making independent decisions that get aggregated. So I’ve tried to argue that Digg isn’t a wisdom of crowds system – it’s more of an information cascade, where everyone just follows the herd (as you perfectly describe!).

I don’t think it’s hit or miss exactly – let’s not forget the long tail here. But I do agree that you need something really special if you’re going to get viral adoption – all these systems favor novel ideas over the humdrum.

Personally, I’ve never bought the gatekeepers argument. The A-listers don’t live in a bubble – everyone reads blogs from “less popular” bloggers, so an interesting piece of info can quickly ascend to prominence. Digg, YouTube and other collaborative filtering systems can also deliver interesting news and videos from previously unknown sources – if you’re creating quality content, you’ll always rise to the top.

]]>