The big news publishing houses are under growing commercial pressures to cut back on investigative reporting resources, but it's not clear what will fill the gap. Sure, the well trained journalists they currently employ may carve out a renewed individualised reputation or work with others to drive a proliferation of more specialised reporting. Squidoo is one portal encouraging this sort of activity, but it's interesting that they are reporting abuse of their rating system.
Jyte too has a cred system that is very open: I can give you cred about anything that is not deemed negative. And that's OK, because jyte is just a bit of fun, albeit addicitve!
But there ought to be a robust, Open Source protocol/algorithm that weights ratings relative to the rater, and in some cases 'walled gardens' where unless you satisfy certain strict criteria you don't get to rate someone at all. But the ratings that accrue in such areas should still be portable to the outside world, the internet at large.
Programmer guys, is this doable? Presumably it would play well with OpenID.
Discussion (3)
CB, why not? Isn't a disagree vote somewhat inconsistent with this comment of yours?
Maybe your disagreement is with the word 'controlled' in the claim? I don't mean it in the sense of some centralised authority managing it. I mean it in the sense of it being precise. Perhaps the word was tautologous given that I'd already said 'robust'.
In case that is where your concern lies, and because there are only two votes on this claim as I write, I'll try again.
Claims inspired by this comment
The web would benefit from a robust, shared ‘cred’ protocol.