Group items tagged

provide greater user value

For numerous reasons the services provided by the commercial companies do not adequately meet the creative, social, political, and financial needs of the 99%

allows self-selected individuals to coalesce into powerful workgroups, forums, and movements.

With the PeerPoint approach, each user will own her own inexpensive internet appliance and all the data and content she creates

If a FreedomBox were used as a starting platform, the PeerPoint application package would be added on top of the FreedomBox security stack.

The common requirements for each PeerPoint app are: world class, best-of-breed open source p2p architecture consistent, granular, user-customizable security management and identity protection integrated with other apps in the suite via a common distributed database and/or “data bus” architecture. consistent, user-customizable large, medium, and small-screen (mobile device) user interfaces ability to interface with its corresponding major-market-share service (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) GPS enabled

First tier applications: distributed database social networking  (comparison of distributed social network applications) trust/reputation metrics crowdsourcing: content collaboration & management  (wiki, Google Docs, or better) project management/workflow data visualization (data sets, projects, networks, etc.) user-customizable complementary currency and barter exchange (Community Forge or better) crowd funding (http://www.quora.com/Is-there-an-open-source-crowdfunding-platform) voting (LiquidFeedback or better) universal search across all PeerPoint data/content and world wide web content

The free-form model connotes more of a sense that all users are on the “same level," and that expertise will be universally recognized and deferred to.

the owner-centric authority model assumes the owner is the de facto expert in the topic at hand

In the case of the Wikipedia, the adherents of the owner-centric model, active in the pre-Wikipedia "Nupedia" model, lost out, and presumable, the success of Wikipedia has proven them wrong

dominance of difficult people, trolls, and their enablers

Far too much credence and respect accorded to people who in other Internet contexts would be labelled "trolls."

Wikipedia has, to its credit, done something about the most serious trolling and other kinds of abuse: there is an Arbitration Committee that provides a process whereby the most disruptive users of Wikipedia can be ejected from the project. But there are myriad abuses and problems that never make it to mediation, let alone arbitration.

most people working on Wikipedia--the constant fighting can be so off-putting as to drive them away

any person who can and wants to work politely with well-meaning

root problem: anti-elitism, or lack of respect for expertise.

Wikipedia lacks the habit or tradition of respect for expertise

nearly everyone with much expertise but little patience will avoid editing Wikipedia