Mindaugas Dagys - Comments

Docs Are Old-School, We Need PageRank for People - http://threeminds.organic.com/2009...

June 14 from Bookmarklet - Comment - Like - Share

nathan, Daniel Rowley, Chris Heath and 84 other people liked this

"PageRank assigns a reputation score to the URL where content is published. This makes it a great fit for content that stays put in one location. However, evolving content distribution via blogs, RSS, guest columns, and syndication are a challenge for PageRank. Tweets, retweets, micropublishing, ratings, and comments - even bigger problems. The solution lies in associating reputation with the identity of the author - a PageRank for People." - Leo Laporte from Bookmarklet

20 more comments

Reminds me of "wuffie" where personal reputation replaces monetary wealth in Cory Doctorow's DOWN AND OUT IN THE MAGIC KINGDOM. - Liam Watts

I love that comic. Makes me chukle every time. - Roberto Bonini

Doctors are catching on to this and have slipped a "patient will not post online comments about doctor" clause into their standard forms. You don't even know you've agreed to it unless you read the whole thing, and who does that? - jjjobst

Desirable, but immensely difficult: how do you define a "person" for rank purposes? We are talking here about a huge collection of disparate things. And, what if, contrary to the online reputation, the real reputation sucks? - Nikos Anagnostou

Agree that we need a soltion for this but a Nikos touches upon is need to agree definitions of scope. Others male valid point also some further discussion and thinking required. - Najeeb Mirza

PersonRank tied to (possibly) OpenId anyone? ...Everytime I click „Like“ FF brain is assigning whuffie to the author of a message. - Mindaugas Dagys

Great analogy Liam. Loved that book. - dthree

Doesn't Googles Sentiment Analysis a step in the right direction? It infers sentiment to rank http://www.seobythesea.com/... and “service,” “value,” and “general comments.” Aspects are defined in one of Google’s papers on sentiment analysis as “properties of an object that can be rated by a user.” Unfortunately, Google is attempting to Patent this process. - Greg

"But you shouldn't !" - Ryo / Fuck Facebook

Yup. This made me think of "Down and out in the Magic Kingdom" too. If you haven't read it, it's worth it. - Chad McCoskey

I would say not desirable - relevance is highly relative when it comes to people, and frankly anything that ranks people by the noise they make online and how many people they can get to claim they are great... will produce the wrong kind of behaviour - Joelle Nebbe (iphigenie)

I agree with Joelle, mostly. The exceptions would be for trolls and spammers -- it's too much work to be on a constant lookout for trolling, and I'd really like to have an automatic metric which would enable me to automatically filter out such rubbish. - Nathaniel Thurston

leo: yes indeed, and such a content filter would work well by taking into account the distance through the social graph between the author and each reader, rather than using a fixed measure of the author's reputation for all readers. - Bob Hitching from fftogo

But I think it's more fair to rank a document, than a person. This is something we shouldn't do at all. - Ryo / Fuck Facebook

Nathaniel - I might agree for spammers, but "trolls" are a difficult thing. Many game changing people were labelled troublemakers first, today we'd call them trolls... - Joelle Nebbe (iphigenie)

Hi Guys - I'm the author of the original article. One thing to keep in mind is that this system could be made topic sensitive. We'd be looking at total contribution/reputation for each person for a specific social graph relating to a specific topic. Is some ways this would be like mapping the Hilltop/HITS algorithms used in algorithmic text search to the social space. The similarity is... more... - Marshall Clark

The problem with any such measure is that some people will take it far too seriously - make it into something authoritative instead of something helpful - and some people will game it. I dont want to have to think about my "score" in any field and have to "work" in the way the score measure in order to be taken seriously - Joelle Nebbe (iphigenie)

Interesting post, I was just thinking today when reading about Listiti.com about how Twitter Lists plus this new form of "Track"/search on them can at least partially solve that problem: Just pick a reputable List, one that is large enough to create a thorough but vetted "universe of discourse" (e.g. Scoble's Tech-News-Brands with 500 entries). Then you're searching over that set, and not over the entire freaking Internet. This pretty much bypasses all of Google's PR machinations and their gaming by SEOs. - Alex Schleber

On SocialToo we're assigning a rank to people based on various points assigned by other people they come in contact (via follow, dms, etc). It has the potential to become this. - Jesse Stay

Yep eBay comes to mind A+++++ Quick operator will deal with again!!!!!!!!!111one - Phill Price from iPhone

But isnt the problem then that all you see and hear is from the "big guys" who are already established, as defined by "in" players who by nature will want to be in the "big guys" good books? We're right back in the landscape of television, where the barrier of entry for new players is high, opinion and value is centrally defined... and we get lower quality and service as none of them tries very hard... - Joelle Nebbe (iphigenie)

Mindaugas Dagys › Comments