I think that wargaming idea is a good one, also the factor of 10. Not much to say, but that it is good food for thought. I do think that experimentation is a legitimate approach. 2) Profit model. I like the marketplace. It could be done right. We do have some ideas baking that concern the user and revenue based on their page. The fact that your submissions are only where they are wanted does give some freedom, -if it scales, of course. Everything is contingent on that. 3) Granularity: I agree with you about symptoms. I think that messing with things, however, is a good way to see how they work. Once again, I agree. A beta Hubski, or a group of users that want to try new functions. There’s nothing wrong with testing things out in the open. It’s not like we are selling baby car seats, after all. One trick is dealing with disagreements regarding what works better. But as a user, I’d appreciate seeing some sausage getting made. It always makes for interesting conversation. 4) Moderation - this is something you should think about more. It's not a problem you have now, but it is likely to be a problem you have in the future. No doubt. It’s on my mind. Sleep will be lost. :) 5) Tags - Current Hubski tags are problematic because there's no taxonomy for them. Well, if I could call tags something else, I might. Consider that they aren’t for categorization. I don’t have much faith in tagging to be honest, and I am not sold on the idea that a robust tagging system could be implemented without consequences. To be honest, the reason they exist has more to do with adding a degree of freedom than with accomplishing what their name suggests. Some time I’ll write something long-winded about my thinking on this. I might be completely wrong about them, however. But, we are soon to go see Beckett’s Endgame!
The point of a "beta" hubski would be to allow users to switch back and forth. Obviously it isn't something you'd want to limit to the chosen few, it's something that would be an "alternative" presentation of the content that would allow people to play with the new toys to see what they get. If beta.hubski.com and hubski.com serve up the same content but one uses new rules and one uses old, it'll be pretty obvious to everyone what the differences are and whether they like them. You could even put a toggle in the header bar, the way demonoid does. RE: Tags Say what you will about them, they work for Getty Images. They work for Flickr. They work for Facebook. They're a fairly accepted shorthand for finding things that interest you - but, as with most things, they rely on a common lexicon. You might be interested in an article I wrote called "Reddit 2.0" which exists only on /r/ultrareddit. My idea was to overlay a new UI for Reddit over the old code such that people could play with Reddit 2.0 without disturbing the million-odd users in their hovels. Of course, it was mostly used by violentacrez to imply that I'm a nazi, but that's water under the bridge. Be it as it may, taxonomy is an important part of anyone's experience. You can't escape it. You can be resistant to it, but people will categorize a movie as sci fi or romantic comedy. People will categorize writing as essays or fiction. People will categorize photos as kittens or cityscapes. It's how we address the world. Denying that sort of taxonomy to users won't change their way of thinking, it will cause them to end-run around your functionality. Better to deal with it than let a "black market" develop. Apropos of nothing, I'm drunk.
One of my favorite new "hubski" changes was the little dot that appears now over the "preview arrow". I noticed that its only there for posts that have "text". I first view these posts. I figure if someone took the time to write about their link and frame the discussion, it's worth checking out. Nice work mk. Great suggestions KB. I too am a bit sauced.
Yes, I think a voluntary opt-in would be the way to go. I'm not much for 'elite' groups. RE: RE: Tags I made some related points to notseamus above http://hubski.com/pub?id=7274 Humor me and let it ride for a while. I want to see the current system under heavier usage. Apropos of nothing, I'm drunk. IMO it's interesting opportunity to revisit drunk writing when sober. It is you that wrote it, but it's not a readily accessible you. Kind of fascinating Jekyll and Hyde stuff, I think. :)
Redditors often argue that karma is make believe number, where in reality it is the most tangible evidence of social influence and worth - essentially karma is a quantification of worth in the reddit community. So I see the key for hubski is equivalently ensuring that popularity ties to the behaviors that you want to promote.
I think there's a danger in making it too much like "goods and services" but I think that allowing people to redeem their hard work for "valuable cash prizes" is a good motivator. Perhaps it's a semantics problem: "karma" is, from a Buddhist perspective, a BAD thing. Perhaps "trust" is a better word. Then the question becomes "how does one earn trust?" I'm sure I'll regret all of this when I sober up.
I agree that having the "hub-wheel" top out is a good thing. It's a way to see that what you're saying or contributing is appreciated. Thats it. It's not a commodity. I think that the one "motivator" that is in place now is how many followers one has. I'm not here for the competition, but if I were that would be one way to know how I'm fairing.
When this was nominated for "comment of the year" in 2009 it had 1800 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/ahg8x/what_is_the... Compare and contrast with yesterday's top comment: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/lpwv1/reddit_what...
Wonderful stuff. I don't even want to read yesterdays top comment. I will be re-reading your comment later to my wife. It's worth sharing and resharing.