This fairly hilarious Saturday Night Live sketch about anonymous Internet commenters reminds me of roughly 95% the comments on YouTube, but fortunately, only 5% of comments I delete off this blog:
Of course, unlike what the sketch suggests, the core problem isn't really anonymous comments per se, but anonymous comments without karma -- comments on systems in which there are no negative repercussions for trollishness, nor positive rewards for quality comments. Years ago, Slashdot introduced a karmic system that largely works in that regard, so it's amazing that so many Internet comment platforms are still dealing with the problem. (And in my experience, Reddit's karmic system works even better than Slashdot's, to the point where comment threads are often more intelligent and content rich than the link on which they're based.)
The biggest irony? Both Facebook and Google are pushing a solution which is basically like this SNL sketch: Demanding that people attach their real names to their Internet comments, on the assumption that only this will elevate the discourse. (The host uses similar logic put forward by Google's Eric Schmidt or Facebook's Randi Zuckerberg.) While real name identities do work to a certain extent, relegating conversations only to real names also diminishes the breath and diversity of comments that people might make, if they could maintain a level of privacy. Though Facebook has already branded itself as a social network for real names, there's still an opportunity for another social network to claim the mantle of karmically-driven pseudonymous identities. Google+ doesn't seem to be interested in that, so maybe that title will go to Twitter.
Diaspora https://joindiaspora.com/ bills itself as the privacy aware open source social network. It may be the answer for those of us who prefer to use our Second Life identities for social discourse.
Posted by: Lukas | Monday, October 03, 2011 at 01:43 PM
The PROBLEM with your solution is that farts will be farts and that the farts that control the "gaming" system will game it themsleves for their own -fart- agenda...
EBAY is the classic example... no real names.. until real money/addresses changes hands... BUT... it had the fair rating system UNTIL Ebay gamed it for only the buyers benefits- actually ebays in reality....a one way truth.
non paying buyers has easily quadrupaled since... yes, no consequences to them.. but then again.. none to EBAY either. Only Sellers loose the money.
The answers are outside of any game design.
Posted by: bongo | Monday, October 03, 2011 at 07:54 PM
What is really needed industry-wide is good, solid moderation. A forum is like a garden: you can't spray it with chemicals from a distance and trust that it will thrive. You got to get down on your hands and knees in the dirt and weed, prune and nurture each individual plant.
Posted by: Arcadia Codesmith | Tuesday, October 04, 2011 at 06:35 AM
I don't mind giving my RL name to Google. I object to giving it out to every Boooobz and YouSuck person out there on the internet. And I don't want to be denied a job someday just because some HR drone can press a button, pay Google a dollar, and read every single thing I've said -- to my friends, to my family, in comment sections. While yes, they are my words, not everything I say is for public dispersion. I DO like to chat with friends sometimes and I would like to know that my conversations are not being collated and sold to the highest bidder.
Google knowing my identity and conversations is one thing. Anybody on the internet who can pay money knowing all of it, that's different.
Posted by: shockwave yareach | Tuesday, October 04, 2011 at 02:53 PM
Thanks for reminding me how unfunny SNL is....
Search College Humor's archive for "internet commenter" to see where they ripped the idea off from...
Caution, though, the original is NSFW.
Posted by: Nan | Wednesday, October 05, 2011 at 09:47 AM