The pre-approved response to the unauthorized comments on the official definition of Web 3.0.
I’d like to start out by thanking everyone who responded to the official definition of Web 3.0 for their participation. I’d also like to thank TechMeme for being the easiest linkbaiting tool in the history of Web 2.0 (can it really be this easy?).
However, I must remind folks that as we build out the infrastructure semantic social graph that people must adhere to the new standards that we’ve put in place. Also, please don’t call them “rules” as they are semantic-based, not rule based.
1. A number of the responses to the post were clearly unauthorized. All responses to blog posts originating off of your blog in Web 3.0–including comments–must require a token pre-approving them by both parties. The “double-opt in rebuttal technology” (aka dobt) that I’ve patented is now build into WordPress so there really isn’t an excuse to not get your pre-approved token before commenting. Also, we have an open source ping server (mayIinterjectOMATIC.org) that is being setup now.
2. A number of the responses and blog posts we’re not cleared through the central Flameoff data cleanser. Filters showed that four comments were at 18% hostility or greater toward either the subject of this post or the topic in general. Two of the comments had remarkably high self-loathing percentages of 34% as well. The Flameoff data cleansing standard was set to tone down the volume level and increase intelligent conversation–remember it’s for your benefit. We wouldn’t insist you use it if it wouldn’t make you a better person. On average the thread was 8% more charged (i.e. hostile) than the national average, if you exclude the outliers of a whopping 89% hostility rating in the Playstation vs. XBOX threads at digg and the 0% hostility rating on the Wikipedia mailing list “no it’s my fault for not anticipating your not understanding what I could have said clearer. I’m so sorry LOL!” thread.
Now that we’ve cleared up the rules… I mean semantic social graphing decision tree… of web 3.0 let’s continue the decision in earnest and with our Flameoff filters on and opt-in rebuttal tokens passed. Comments are on (how could they not be?).
1 Comment »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
This article and Web 3.0 want to suppress passionate opinion. We need more passionate opinion, instead of bland “objective” content. Mainstream journalism calls for “objectivity” – which is just an excuse to suppress real opinions. Mainstream media is being challenged by the Internet’s egalitarian enabling, where people have a voice to express their opinions and passions. With its requirement to become “registered” and “accredited” (ie become a ‘trusted expert’, or even have a pre-approved token to post a reply to this article!) and with its distain of the peoples’ voice, Web3.0 is a an attempt to reduce individuals’ freedoms, and is a big step in the wrong direction that ultimately leads to centralised control of the Internet! Web 3.0? I say NAZI 3.0!
Comment by MyOpinion — July 20, 2009 @ 6:42 am