I don't agree with the main point of this post, but rthe reasons are complex. Here's the main point: "rom the 'information age', we are moving towards the 'reputation age', in which information will have value only if it is already filtered, evaluated and commented upon by others. Seen in this light, reputation has become a central pillar of collective intelligence today. It is the gatekeeper to knowledge, and the keys to the gate are held by others." Now this isn't wrong, exactly, but the use of the word 'reputation' suggests that it's the others' reputation (standing in the community? track record? number of followers?) that will make them a 'gatekeeper'. But no - this is just a return to the way we used to do it. It's not reputation that makes someone a gatekeeper, it's connection, and connections come and go not based on anything like reputation, but in the continuing value you - as an individual - see in continuing to maintain that connection.
Today: 3 Total: 109 [Direct link] [Share]
