Home Closet How are social network contributors worse than bank contributors?

How are social network contributors worse than bank contributors?

by admin

More and more materials are appearing about the rights and obligations of social network users.There is even talk of a union of social network users.However, there are not many places where the question of information depositors’ rights is raised in full voice.More about responsibilities. I’ve already talked about one of those rights – a blogger’s right not to respond to a comment. And now I want to talk about another right – the right of the author not to be subjected to subjective evaluations and insulting comments. And related to that. obligation of the owner of any social resource to protect this right of his information contributors.
Among the labels that are sometimes thrown at me was "resentful contributor." Such a definition did not seem to me at first to be a good analogy, connected with the financial adventures of the "troubled times. However, only recently I suddenly understood its deeper meaning. I don’t know if the author of this "term" had it in mind, but see for yourself.
After all, every blogger, in fact, contributes what is now commonly referred to as content to some worldwide information bank. Why they do it, and who needs it, are separate questions, but the fact of the contribution remains undeniable. There are very few people capable of generating original content; they say no more than 10% of all users of the social Internet.
I’m not going to touch on the issue of paying for information, which has been brought up by many people. Some of them even say that this will be the main quality of Web3.0. I don’t know, but I’m sure that authors in social networks need a certain motivation for their work after all. And the minimum that any normal person hopes for, regardless of whether he printed an extended article in his own blog, made a small comment in someone else’s, spoke on a forum or shared an interesting link with other users, providing it with an annotation, is a respectful attitude to his "contribution". By the way, in Clear Space, all content contributors are called contributors.
But after all, any information contributor has some sort of interest in launching information into social media, the reader will say. And you can get hurt for your interest. I won’t argue. In very many cases this is true – one interest or another has a place. But the bank depositor, as a rule, doesn’t invest his hard-earned money out of charity. There is an interest. And yet bankers have great respect for depositors. P I don’t even need to explain why this happens. And how are the owners of social resources different from bankers? Why do they, for the most part, disrespect their depositors so much?
I’m well aware that it’s hard for the administrators of these resources to keep track of everything, even with the help of NLo :). But why not, for example, in the same Habra, delegate the function of bringing order to the moderators of each collective blog? After all, a collective blog is essentially a community of like-minded people. Why can’t I, as the custodian of that blog, close it to comments from people who aren’t on the collective blog? And why can’t I kick any member off the blog for dirty comments? All Hubr allows me today is to close the collective blog to new notes (threads) from non-members. True, any member of the blog can make a closed post. But few people use it, because in that case no one else’s notes can even read them. And everyone is interested in attracting new readers. In other words, the following rule should work in a collective blog : "You’re welcome to read, but you have to earn the right to comment."
A more detailed text of this post with all the necessary links can be found in my iTech Bridge blog

You may also like