#1
Posted: 8/23/13 at 10:45am
It is a commonly held believe that anonymous posting is a prime contributor to online trolling and bullying. Being able to hide behind a fictitious username and avatar icon offers a false sense of protection that some posters use to express themselves in ways that they wouldn't if their identities were known and they could be held accountable for their words and actions.
It is also a common belief that anonymity is a necessary safety precaution for Internet usage. I believe nothing could be further from the truth... Facebook knows who you are, and every site that uses facebook's API (application programming interface) has access to much of that information.
These days we are constantly being bombarded with information regarding our government's misuse of our personal "meta" data. The truth is many - if not most - of us have willingly given that information up when we joined the social media revolution. (How many of you have noticed that the ads on other websites are targeted to your passion of the theater - Pippin / Kinky Boots much?)
Here on this board, Dear Rob…, is one of the most popular threads currently running. Clearly we have a "troll" "trolling" "bullying" problem. It has been discussed and agreed that soon we'll see the reinstatement of a past feature, "Ignore".
I am an Information Architect by profession - I design the interface for high-end websites. (My portfolio includes Citibank and hp to name just two.) I can't predict the future, but I can say that current Internet science believes that there is a reason why the "Ignore" feature wasn't used and eventually went alway. They don't provide the user with the optimum experience and hence they don't work.
I briefly wrote about reputational systems in the, Dear Rob..., thread. It didn't get any traction and even one user put it down without truly understanding what they are. (I blame my own laziness for not explaining it more clearly.) I also attached a link from an article regarding The Huffington's Post move to remove all anonymity from their comments feature.
If BroadwayWorld truly wishes to make a serious effort to remove the negativity that plagues this site, they would work with their developers to research such reputational systems and even consider removing the anonymous nature of our membership.
1. Anonymity: Who cares what we post. We're discussing theater, not terrorism. Why shouldn't we include our names and even a photo. It might even be fun, as those of us who are local - and our visitors - might recognize each other and begin conversations and actual live social interactions and not the "facebook" kind.
2. Reputational Systems: (a better explanation)... This is not as the poster who condemned such technology believed. There is no "scorecard" in the traditional sense. It is not gamification or even a contest. It is a tracking system that accounts for many aspects of social media. Using an algorithm system, it considers each user and each user's reaction to each and every posts.
How this is accomplished is quite complex and perhaps out of budget for a site like BroadwayWorld, but to clear up the misconceptions, I will try and offer a simplified explanation...
Each user is given what in the industry is considered, "karma" points. Everyone gets them. As you become more and more a trusted source, your karma increases. If on the other hand your activities are suspect, they decrease. Attached to every post is a flagging system where a user can "like" "dislike" "report" etc. a post that they find positive or offensive. That flag is valued based on the user who does the flagging and how many flags a post receives. Again, a very complex algorithm. If there are multiple flags reporting a post as abusive, the karma points reflect that. Know that the karma points don't just go against the poster, but also for those who point out the abuse. Again, also weighted by the history of the poster and those users reporting the post.
All of this is transparent to the user, but creates a far more effective queue for the few moderators to check the offending post and deem whether or not it should be removed. Again, the ultimate action of the moderator also effects the karma system.
This is how most of today's larger "social" websites work. It is the only practical way that such sites can work. (Can you imagine how many moderators it would take to check every facebook post?)
Per The Huffington Post, who employs such a system, it was still not enough. They are going to be pioneers and deem that posting on their site requires removing your anonymity. This is the direction the web is going. Get ready for it. It is coming.
It is also a common belief that anonymity is a necessary safety precaution for Internet usage. I believe nothing could be further from the truth... Facebook knows who you are, and every site that uses facebook's API (application programming interface) has access to much of that information.
These days we are constantly being bombarded with information regarding our government's misuse of our personal "meta" data. The truth is many - if not most - of us have willingly given that information up when we joined the social media revolution. (How many of you have noticed that the ads on other websites are targeted to your passion of the theater - Pippin / Kinky Boots much?)
Here on this board, Dear Rob…, is one of the most popular threads currently running. Clearly we have a "troll" "trolling" "bullying" problem. It has been discussed and agreed that soon we'll see the reinstatement of a past feature, "Ignore".
I am an Information Architect by profession - I design the interface for high-end websites. (My portfolio includes Citibank and hp to name just two.) I can't predict the future, but I can say that current Internet science believes that there is a reason why the "Ignore" feature wasn't used and eventually went alway. They don't provide the user with the optimum experience and hence they don't work.
I briefly wrote about reputational systems in the, Dear Rob..., thread. It didn't get any traction and even one user put it down without truly understanding what they are. (I blame my own laziness for not explaining it more clearly.) I also attached a link from an article regarding The Huffington's Post move to remove all anonymity from their comments feature.
If BroadwayWorld truly wishes to make a serious effort to remove the negativity that plagues this site, they would work with their developers to research such reputational systems and even consider removing the anonymous nature of our membership.
1. Anonymity: Who cares what we post. We're discussing theater, not terrorism. Why shouldn't we include our names and even a photo. It might even be fun, as those of us who are local - and our visitors - might recognize each other and begin conversations and actual live social interactions and not the "facebook" kind.
2. Reputational Systems: (a better explanation)... This is not as the poster who condemned such technology believed. There is no "scorecard" in the traditional sense. It is not gamification or even a contest. It is a tracking system that accounts for many aspects of social media. Using an algorithm system, it considers each user and each user's reaction to each and every posts.
How this is accomplished is quite complex and perhaps out of budget for a site like BroadwayWorld, but to clear up the misconceptions, I will try and offer a simplified explanation...
Each user is given what in the industry is considered, "karma" points. Everyone gets them. As you become more and more a trusted source, your karma increases. If on the other hand your activities are suspect, they decrease. Attached to every post is a flagging system where a user can "like" "dislike" "report" etc. a post that they find positive or offensive. That flag is valued based on the user who does the flagging and how many flags a post receives. Again, a very complex algorithm. If there are multiple flags reporting a post as abusive, the karma points reflect that. Know that the karma points don't just go against the poster, but also for those who point out the abuse. Again, also weighted by the history of the poster and those users reporting the post.
All of this is transparent to the user, but creates a far more effective queue for the few moderators to check the offending post and deem whether or not it should be removed. Again, the ultimate action of the moderator also effects the karma system.
This is how most of today's larger "social" websites work. It is the only practical way that such sites can work. (Can you imagine how many moderators it would take to check every facebook post?)
Per The Huffington Post, who employs such a system, it was still not enough. They are going to be pioneers and deem that posting on their site requires removing your anonymity. This is the direction the web is going. Get ready for it. It is coming.
ARTc3 formerly ARTc. Actually been a poster since 2004. My name isn't Art. Drop the "3" and say the signature and you'll understand.
Updated On: 8/23/13 at 10:45 AM