Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality

scubacuda writes "Clay Shirky has written an excellent article entitled "Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality." Simply put, diversity plus freedom of choice creates inequality: "A new social system starts, and seems delightfully free of the elitism and cliquishness of the existing systems. Then, as the new system grows, problems of scale set in. Not everyone can participate in every conversation. Not everyone gets to be heard. Some core group seems more connected than the rest of us, and so on." A must read for anyone interested in the statistics, fairness, and power relations of blogging."

Comments

Linux?

[Amsterdam Vallon]

Blockquoth the poster:

Then, as the new system grows, problems of scale set in. Not everyone can participate in every conversation. Not everyone gets to be heard. Some core group seems more connected than the rest of us, and so on.

Sure, but this is how a good community is made.

Just like Slashdot and Kuro5hin, you need to rate people based on the typical quality of contributions that they make, whether via story submissions, comments, or diary/journal entries.

I mean, can you imagine a thousand CLIT posts (like that last story had) filling up every weblog from 1.1.1.1 to 255.255.255.255?

Seriously, even if just a few people feel like they "don't belong", it's to the benefit of the community as a whole to give a relative rating to all content that's posted on a site. Friend/foe systems, such as the one here at Slashdot, tend to actually make community better rather than worse.

I love Web communities (just look at how much time I was on them ;-D). I get to discuss things, joke around with friends with similar interests, and also just kill time on slow work days.

Anyone who feels left out on the Web, a place where anyone can post nearly anything at any time on any server, should really consult a psychologist or something.

[End rant]