Scott: in any case, i'm currently not debating this point as there are other things to discuss me: sorry, fucking net cut out me: one sec me: not sure if you got last message me: As I said, I think that compromise I've suggested is best solution me: regarding Campbell me: he obviously has extraordinary experience and has been very helpful and active me: but no one is indispensable. Hopefully we will be able to get everybody on the same page, but there are certain things that I have to stick to me: basically, it should immediately concern a programmer when his audience doesn't like some features me: and when one of those people is the guy who designed the original schematic me: I'm hoping that we can get this revolved tonight me: and there are other features he could add Scott: i don't think it's worth getting as bent out of shape on this as it seems me: but they've have to be things that promote info as a reward for high marks, rather than deter Scott: i don't think campbell is married to the idea me: good, then Scott: and as a group we're creative enough to come up with a solution that meets all parties needs Scott: it would be shortsighted in my opinion to have this decision reflect on the whole Scott: i concur with both parties as I see campbell's reasoning and I understand your concerns. Scott: While never implemented the investing website I belong has long tackled the idea of implementing a probationary period on new persons as new persons don't always understand the culture immediately. Scott: but like i said, it has not been implemented. me: right me: basically I don't want anything that prevents two people to connect if they choose to do so me: and both of those components prevent them from doing so Scott: the first defintely does Scott: but that can be changed so communication is possible me: the second does to the extent that one does not gain enough points by virtue of having done certain things me: and that radically changes the design Scott: instead of a probationary period, would bloggers be against an endorsement period? Scott: well what if i said every person starts with 1000 invites Scott: do earn more they need to get more points? me: what problem do you think that will solve? Scott: not saying this is likely but to the extreme Scott: i can send my invites to a million friends who then all give my works thumbs up me: someone who can do that will be recruited and brought into PM's main crew Scott: i meant in a negative way :) me: I know what you meant Scott: aka hey guys, vote for me me: but such a person clearly has an organizational structure that few people have Scott: yes Scott: maybe you're right me: that's very, very rare Scott: on the invites me: look at Facebook me: do you have 100 people liking your stuff? me: I don't Scott: i hardly have 100 friends me: I have occasionally 2 people me: I have hundreds and many are fans me: some are good friends me: and I get maybe two or three "likes" me: the thing about all of this is me: although I haven't had the time to do so Scott: i see your points Scott: and im even learning towards your decision Scott: but i think it's important to recognize one aspect me: I have a lot that should have been explained early on Scott: by limiting invites it puts an onerous on the individual to ensure they use their invites wisel Scott: wisely Scott: creates a sort of elitism and quality check me: yes, but let's say they don't me: let's say they invite 200 me: then they have two hundred people sending them their posts me: are they going to sit there all day pushing all of these posts? me: and who will accept those pushes? me: if someone does, then let them Scott: ok fair points me: the thing about the schematic is that it does these things automatically Scott: if this is something that is a deal breaker for bloggers then i concede it's not worth the risk me: and I don't think that enough thought was put into either of those things me: I'm not perfect me: but I've spent a great deal of time on this question me: and have experience in blogging, networking, media start-ups, etc. me: so by virtue of what I've seen Scott: in life it's the black and white questions that are easy me: I do have sort of a head start Scott: it's when there's no clear right or wrong that debate is necessary Scott: as for the probationary period, i'd like to discuss it further. Specifically modifying it to be less restrictive and more about endorsement. Scott: if possible me: we can certainly discuss it me: but it's going to be hard to convince me to knowingly turn off bloggers and prevent people from getting started using our full functionality right off the bat me: Scott, people aren't going to give us a lot of time Scott: i understand that Scott: we need to expand rapidly me: I know full well that I would likely just forget about it me: no, no me: I'm not talking about expanding rapidly, really me: rather that a lot of people are not going to sign up and then work through whatever probationary period metrics that have been decided on me: Again, I'm using myself as a barometer Scott: i take that point Scott: which is why i'd eliminate the restrictions me: "Would I be likely to use this, and how happy would I be with it?" Scott: what i'm suggesting is to still make it so that for this X period if you invite me, then eveyrthing i push will say "endorsed by BB" me: And if the answer is "maybe" and "whatever," then it's a non-starter me: oh, that's infe me: fine me: I don't care if there's a tag saying that me: just no probationary restrictions Scott: ok well then see Scott: we're already making compromises :) Scott: this alone "should" make sure a person invites people they truly want to be associated with rather than someone who is simply going to "like" them me: at any rate, there are any number of networks that can be devised Scott: at least that's my rapid-fire thoughts on it, which can change at a moment's notice me: and experiments can be done in terms of us limiting various actions Scott: of course me: but I'm not going to tell Glenn Greenwald or even some clever but small-time blogger that he needs to collect points to invite some colleague in Scott: ok well in my mind starting bloggers would have X amount of invites to give no matter what, like the Gmail system, but yes, i see your point me: as I noted, although we've had discussions about these things and you guys have put some thought it, I've obviously been going over this with a lot of other people of varying backgrounds, none of whom are less qualified to assess these issues than is anyone else Scott: certainly when designing system it's important to get feedback from end users Scott: which is why I'm not too concerned about this as I always think compromises are possible, and if as you say this is a deal breaker, then I don't think it's worth instituting, especially in its current form. me: anyway, I'm sure we can work it out this evening Scott: agreed Scott: onto other things Scott: did you read what I wrote before and wihle you got disconnected? me: yeah, went to my mailbox Scott: thoughts on the website? me: haven't thought about it much yet Scott: i think it's important so we can proceed to expand beyond just your contacts, not diminishing your contacts, just helping to better broaden our people base to secondary and tertiary contacts me: of course me: I don't have much I can do regarding website other than to select content for it me: which we're also doing with the wiki now Scott: if a portion of tonight can be directed towards someone who can help design the site Scott: we have tons of information and my concern is that it needs to be presented as best as possibly for the new comers Scott: also i think listing certain key people i.e. mano, lipp, yourself will provide sticking power