Identity
Filter
Visitors
(2) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (16) (0) (0) (61) (0) (0) (0)Subscribers
(0) (0)
Links
Blogs
Democracy
Search
[top-politics] Re: Parlement Version 0.9
-
Gale,
I see your point. But on the flip side, don’t you think only seeing what people who think alike have noted as interesting is very likely to entrench people in what they think and ultimately harm the debate? Wouldn’t a good use of your proxies, who would be people who think alike and keep you informed, coupled with a majority-style ranking, bring a better compromise?
Serge
--—-—----—-—-—---—~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics?hl=en--—---------———--~-
+1
-
There are merely consumers who want decent debate and “researchers” who are willing to check someones credibility, test it, promote it. So, if consumer wants to see/test reputation, it is only one/two hits he has to do. Of course, lazy ones will be lazy ones, yet this laziness is measured in months of common sense delay, which is not long time in political process.
Anyway, I have nothing against majority-style ranking, see that as common most easily recognized tech for evaluating common opinion, so it wont harm anything in process of choosing proxies, I believe.
ATB,
Gale--—-—----—-—-—---—~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to top-politics@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics?hl=en--—---------———--~-
+1
-
