With these in mind, what we really need is to have an appropriate solution to ananomity that can balance out the goods and bads and yield the best result. The article that we read in this unit all offer some useful insight about how we should deal with ananomity, but some of them seem to have one fault which I think is the biggest problem here. For some reason, they tried to use one solution and apply it all to the entire internet. For example, the article "Don't Identify by Names Online but by knowledge" by Annemarie Dooling belief that requring people to have appropriate background and proof them by giving them to the moderators or admin. While that is an awesome idea, the we would ended up with a forum full of elitist, while some of the bright thinkers who do not have appropriate background, are restricted from speaking.
Of course, some subreddit or website definitely benefited from having users become verified before they can start posting, as evidence by how /r/polandball or /r/askhistorians manage to maintain the high quality standard. But places like /r/paradoxplaza or 4chan.org would definitely lose their charms and their uniqueness if the moderators start demanding that people have to share their expertise on the subject or giving up their ananomity before they can share something.
Internet is such a large place. A quick scroll through some board on 4 chan comparing to people's experience with /r/askhistorians can definitely tell you that. Just trying to apply one solution onto the entire internet would be impractical, and possibly bring down the quality of experience that people have on the internet, which is why we need to use different approach on different places in order to ensure maximum quality.
No comments:
Post a Comment