Assignment 2 Submissions
Submission Instructions
Please note that we have updated the final project page's FAQ section based on some student questions that have come to us over the past week.
This assignment is due on March 3rd. Grading for this assignment is on a 5-point scale; late assignments will be docked 1 point for each day they are late (assignments submitted 4 days late or later will have a maximum grade of 1 point).
Please name your file "wikiusername_Assignment2," where "wikiusername" is replaced with your username, to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment or causing errors in the Wiki by including forbidden characters. So if your username is "jdoe" and your file is a Word document your file should be named "jdoe_Assignment2.doc."
Upload your rough draft here: Upload file. If you have trouble finding the file you uploaded, check the list of uploaded files.
In the submissions section below please post the following information:
- Name or pseudonym:
- Prospectus title:
- Link to prospectus: (add your link here)
Comments
Everyone will receive an additional participation grade for this assignment. You should read through everyone's proposals after they are uploaded and add constructive comments below the proposal on which you're commenting. Comments should be submitted by March 10th so you have time to incorporate them, if applicable, into your project outline. Please remember to sign your comments by adding four tildes (~~~~) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post. If we don't know who you are we can't give you credit for finishing this assignment!
Ryan Hurley
Facebook & Big Data vs. Your Privacy
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Prospectus_FB_and_privacy_Assignment_2.docx
Rhurls (talk) 16:06, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Olivia Brinich
Intentions and Outcomes of Youtube’s Copyright and Coding Regulations
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Oliviabrinich_prospectus03.03.15.pdf
Oliviabrinich (talk) 15:51, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Comments on Olivia's Prospectus:
Hi Olivia,
Let me start by saying I think that Youtube is a great source for your project. I’m not saying that just because I am doing my paper on Youtube. I find the creative ways that people are using it fascinating. Much more so than some of the other platforms.
If I may summarize, you plan to discuss how legal pressures forced Youtube to introduce technologies that changed the user experiences, like Copyright ID. You also mentioned some other (possibly voluntary) technologies that are part of the user experience with the intent to discuss how they impact users. I think they are good ideas and good concepts to write about.
As you rightly point the Youtube community is one of the largest communities on the Internet. I wonder if it might not be taking on too much to try to examine Youtube as a whole. I would suggest selecting a small group that is susceptible to the effects of the technologies you are reviewing. Describe who the group is and how certain characteristics of their make-up or user experience make them particularly sensitive to the technologies you will focus on.
For example I will be focusing on hobbyist inventors. Guys that spend their weekends in the garage putting “junk” together and posting videos about their “inventions” on Youtube. Their content is all original so they are not impacted by Copyright ID. There is very little thumbs up/down. They are a much more “expressive” crowd as the comments indicate.
I’m not trying to discourage you. I think if you pick the right group and tell us why you picked them, it can very interesting. I hope that is helpful.
Best,
RMarkow (talk) 19:47, 4 March 2015 (EST)
• Erika L Rich
• Title: Reputation Management and Ethical Considerations for Members of the Internet Marketing Super Friends (IMSF) Facebook Group
• Link: File:LSTU E120 Erika Rich Assignment 2.docx
ErikaLRich (talk) 15:22, 3 March 2015 (EST)
• Emily MacIntyre (EmiMac)
• Prospectus title: A Case Study on the Unintended Legal Consequences and Chilling Effects of YouTube’s Content ID Sweep on its Video Game Commentator Community
• Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Emily_MacIntyre_Assignment_2.pdf
EmiMac (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2015 (EST)
Emily,
Great job on your prospectus! It is very well organized, and your citations sources are well researched. I found your research really enticing because I had never heard of this sweep, and I consider myself an avid youtube visitor. I think you are on to a great research project. Although the topic is remarkably fascinating, I wonder if investigating and juxtaposing the different types of monitoring will be too large or too abstract for the limit of the project. I also read up on the PewDiePie character cited, and I think it is really fascinating to see that he has 35 mil subscribers, yet chose to turn off his commenting feature because of how volatile he claimed the space was becoming. His specific youtube channel then does not have a community to investigate. But it would be interesting to examine someone or a specific youtube channel that has a similar following as the case study to better help zone in on collecting and investigating data. Thank you for this topic, I am currently reading more about the youtube actions in 2008 and 2013 because I had little to no prior knowledge of both events.
Good luck on your project!
Mhoching (talk) 00:09, 5 March 2015 (EST)
RE: Mhoching,
Thank you for your comment. I very much like your prospectus topic as well as you can see from my comments below. With regards to my final project, I thought I should reiterate and clarify that my community is the YouTube contributors that concentrate on making Let’s Plays and video game reviews. While it is helpful to find a video with an active comment section, where other users further explain how the ID sweep influences their output choices, in the case of PewDiePie, his decision to turn off his comment section does in part illustrate how YouTube has rapidly evolved. Since Google began catering to commercial enterprises over the original volunteer contributors, some of the volunteer contributors have become increasingly more frustrated and they exhibit their frustration in a variety of ways.
Thanks Again,
Emily
EmiMac (talk) 09:37, 5 March 2015 (EST)
• MattK
• Home of the Mallet of Loving Correction: John Scalzi's Blog, "Whatever"
• http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:MattK_Assignment2.docx
MattK (talk) 22:01, 2 March 2015 (EST)
Edwin Duque (Edwinduque)
Prospectus Title:The copyright, privacy and organization challenges that online communities such as Facebook and The Jury Deliberation in the cyber space are faced with
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Edwinduque_Assignment_2.doc
(Edwinduque (talk) 22:10, 2 March 2015 (EST))
Name: Michelle Byrne (Chelly.Byrne)
Prospectus title: Balancing privacy for victims of sexual crimes with opportunity for support in online forum AfterSilence.org
Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:ChellyByrne_Assignment2.pdf
chelly byrne (talk) 07:54, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Chanel Rion (ChanelRion)
Prospectus Title: We the Judges: "Sitejabber", "Yelp", and Communities of User-Generated Business Reviews.
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Assignment2_Prospectus_Rion.docx
Chanel Rion (talk) 11:21, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Becca Lewis (beccalew)
Prospectus Title: /r/TwoXChromosomes and /r/feminism: The challenges of promoting feminism on Reddit while upholding the values of privacy and free speech
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Final_Project_Prospectus_Becca_Lewis.docx
Beccalew (talk) 13:15, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Hi Becca! I absolutely love the theme of your project, it is an exceptional live issue since feminism has been discussed much more this past year than it has been for many years. Therefore, it´s really important to examine the forums in which people have the opportunity to discuss the subject. Great!
I also found it cool that you are thinking about recording a podcast for the project. If you do so, you might consider including an interview with someone active in the specific forums, a professor in gender studies or perhaps two people with different views on the issue?
I have a question about the subreddits you talked about though. You wrote about a ”safe space” for women. Are those subreddits only for women or are they open for anyone who want to discuss feminism and gender roles? If it is a women-only forum, you might also discuss the consequences on that. If not, maybe that has consequences as well. Maybe you should discuss self censorship in the feminism subreddits as well (which is very interesting since Reddit-as you said-values free speech above almost all else)?
Good luck! /Josefin
JosefinS (talk) 10:39, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Gary Brown (Gary Brown)
Prospectus Title: The Effects of Site Controls on Community Objectives: communityfunded.com
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Gary_Brown_Assignment2.docx
Gary Brown (talk) 13:18, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Comments on Gary's Prospectus:
Gary,
Great topic! I hope to be going out to for crowdfunding by the end of the May. So I will follow your Wiki with interest. (In your proposal you link to crowdfunded. I think you meant community funded. You may want to look at that.)
You mentioned the stated purpose of Communityfunded. But you did not mention their reason for existing. In other words, what started crowdfunding and why would individuals seek funds for their projects from the public and not other traditional sources. Why are people like me willing to go online (to communityfunded) to ask for money, as opposed to going to another site or pitching a Venture Capitalist or a bank? Why would people fund a project on line versus invest in the stock market or Bank CDs?
I think that the answer to those questions goes to the heart of crowdfunding. It also is germane to the “troublesome obstacles” you refer to in your prospectus.
When you mention failed projects, I would suggest that not all failures are the same. I might be willing to invest money in a project I consider socially redeeming even if I thought it had very little chance of success. Where as, if I were investing in some Harvard wiz-kids that profess to have the next Facebook, I might have very different feelings if they went belly up. So you may want to include categories of projects, or claims/expectations in your discussions. As well as any risk factor ratings.
You also mentioned building and keeping trust of supporters. One of the areas that interests me is the ways that Fundraisers generate funding support. Do they rely solely on the site? In other words, is there a pool of would be investors just waiting for the right idea to come around so they can invest. Or is a fundraiser expected to go outside the community and raise interest and drive that interest back to the site? How does that impact the “trust” factor? If I am a one-time fundraiser does it matter all that much what people think about me after I’ve got my money?
You discuss how you will break down funded projects, etc. Is there a way to figure out what various fundraiser did to get funded? Marketing may prove to be more of a factor than the project or its worthiness.
It would certainly be worthwhile to compare and contrast crowdfunding before and after changes in regs that made it easier for the public to invest. And how post reg trends may lead to new regs/controls.
I look forward to reading your paper.
Best,
RMarkow (talk) 20:45, 4 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Meagan HoChing (mhoching)
Title: Online Gaming Harassment: All fun and games?
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Mhoching_Assignment2.docx
Mhoching (talk) 13:50, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Hi Meagan,
Every aspect of your prospectus is incredibly interesting to me. I am especially intrigued by how well you have matched up the readings to your topic.
After I read your section on Norms I thought about how you point out that “the gaming system is very competitive” and it made me wonder, if Valve placed more restrictions to prevent bullying could it potentially take some of the pleasure of competition out of the mix. If so, then would some users leave the game because they like the hostile environment, which may be why they chose to play in it in the first place. Keeping this line of thought in mind, perhaps you could find another similar community that has more strict modes of control in place to observe the differences between them.
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your prospectus and I look forward to seeing your finished product.
Best, Emily
EmiMac (talk) 09:25, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Hi Meagan!
What an interesting and relevant subject!
I think that it was a very good idea of you to use the Dot Model with the components ”Market”, ”Architecture”, ”Norms” and ”Law”, it makes everything much more clear. I agree with Emily that it would be a good idea to compare DOTA 2 with another game, preferably from another website than STEAM and with another system of regulation. I would find it really interesting to see the result of a such a study and if norms, the language, the members of the site, etc. differ between the two games.
I´m looking forward to see the result! Good luck!
/Josefin
JosefinS (talk) 10:16, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Caroline B
Title: The Study of Privacy, Accuracy & Order on InsideNova Website and Moving ‘Little Sites’ Up
Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:1_Caroline_B.docx
Cbore001 (talk) 14:45, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Jan.Yburan
Prospectus title: Reddit.com/r/IAmA its Controls on Privacy and Content
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Jan.Yburan.Assignment2.docx
Hi Jan,
This is a really interesting community to build your case study around. Prior to today I have only been on the site a few times to look at subreddits that relate to topics that I am interested in, and since I am not a member I have not considered how the site protects the user’s privacy.
Today I decided to look at the IAmA subreddit to get a better handle of the scope of your project. Consequently, I came across and interesting and fairly benign thread started by an employee of a movie theater and it brought to mind, how does the site handle issues of privacy, libel or defamation against a company or a consumer when an employee engages in what appears at first glance as an anonymous tell all blog that highlights how he/she has witnessed vulgar and perhaps even criminal activity.
Considering your topic and direction you want to take, I think you might want to blend together aspects of the readings from our classes on privacy with the readings for next week’s class on free expression, information, and unwanted speech.
I am looking forward to seeing your completed final project. I am sure it will be very informative.
Best,
Emily
P.S. (Here is the link to the AMA I referenced: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2xz6nb/iama_movie_theater_employee_and_ive_seen_the/)
EmiMac (talk) 13:04, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Eric Yuk Lun Kwong (Caelum)
Prospectus title: The vulnerable voting structure of Digg.com and the gradual collapse of its popularity and voting legitimacy
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Caelum_Assignment2.pdf
Caelum (talk) 15:11, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Alex Samaei (Samaei1)
Prospectus title: The Framework of Projects and Backers on Kickstarter
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Samaei1_Assignment2.pdf
Samaei1 (talk) 15:37, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Hi Alex!
I'm so happy you picked this website because I've donated to various projects on this website, but never took into account the structure of the website and complications due to misappropriating of funding. I find it hard to try to quantify what is appropriate to fundraise, because the topic is subjective. Of course I don't think it would be appropriate to fundraise to support hate speech (if that's what someone is fundraising for), yet I don't find it appropriate to fundraise for movies about starving children, when that money can go to feeding starving children. I hope I'm communicating the subjectiveness of trying to find what would be considered appropriate to raise money for and how it varies from person to person.
But speaking in regards to the Lessig's Dot Model I think the website can be broken down into different sections to address some of the issues you raise. For example, how does the structure of kickstarter promote accountability on the artist/person asking for money? On the donation page for example, a vast amount of information about the artist is available, as well as avenues in which you can contact the fundraiser. So if kickstarter has provided this as a requirement for people to submit or provide when asking to be funded, is it then up to the donor to hold that person accountable? I have the tools on that page to ask the fundraiser for that specific information and continue to follow up on that information. I think once you start looking at specific/deliberate aspects of kickstarter, it will start to inform or control behavior.
I hope this helps! Look forward to reading the final project; happy researching and writing!
Mhoching (talk) 00:35, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Gia
Prospectus title: Chivalry online
Link to prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Gia_Assignment2.docx (Gia (talk) 15:46, 3 March 2015 (EST))
Name: Mishal R. Kennedy
Prospectus title: Enforcing Guidelines Without Harming User Contributions
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Mishal_R._Kennedy_Assignment2.rtf (Mishal R. Kennedy (talk) 15:51, 3 March 2015 (EST))
Name: Richard Markow
Prospectus title: The YouTube video-sharing platform & The Community of Alternative Heating Systems and Appliance Inventors
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Rich_Markow_Assignment_2_Prospectus.pdf
RMarkow (talk) 16:03, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name AlexanderH
Prospectus Title: Managing the Petitions of Change.org: B Corps, Social Enterprise and Transparency
Link:http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:AlexanderH_Assignment_2_Prospectus.docx
AlexanderH (talk) 16:10, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Meredith Blake
Prospectus Title:Identifying Avenues of Recourse for Businesses on Yelp
Link to Prospectus: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Meredith_Blake._Assignment_2.docx Meredith (talk) 16:13, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Wesley Verge
Prospectus Title : Scrolling into Darkness -- An investigation into the regulatory forces at work in Youtube's comment section
Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/sites/is2015/images/Wesley_Verge_Prospectus.txt
WesleyVerge (talk) 16:19, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Kelly Wilson
Prospectus Title: Knocking the Wind out of Whistleblowers: The US' response to the growing threat from WikiLeaks
Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Kelly.WilsonAssignment_2.docx
Kelly.wilson (talk) 16:38, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Tasha
Prospectus Title: Exploring the Complexity of Rapidly Evolving Information in a Bodybuilding Forum and the Challenges of Quality Assurance
Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Tasha_Assignment_2_Prospectus.docx
TashaTasha (talk) 17:12, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Josefin Sasse
Prospectus Title: A case study on the children's website Kidzworld and how they deal with threats against being a safe environment for children.
Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:JosefinSasse.pdf JosefinS (talk) 17:26, 3 March 2015 (EST)
Hi Josefin!
I find your topic utterly intriguing. I had no idea such a website existed and it's been quite fascinating just poking around the website a little bit. I think it is a very valid point to raise about "who monitors Kidzworld", because there doesn't seem to be much of a screening process to ensure the user that is signing up for an account is in fact between the ages of 9-17. Also, I see you have cited the Pew Research Center study from the readings, which is a great resource for dissecting the demographics and statistics of harassment, but the study was done on "young adults" ranging from 18-29, and "young women" between the ages of 18-24 years old. Which I hope illuminates, rather than complicates, the issue of doing research on a demographic ranging from 9-17, but more so how do you set up a website that serves a population that would need adult consent to participate in almost everything they do. Along with privacy issues, I think the question of who is responsible for what and for whom is a great aspect you have raised in your paper! I would love to stay in touch and see the developments of your paper if that would be okay. I think this is the perfect website to investigate for this project.
Mhoching (talk) 00:10, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Hi Josefin,
I think you picked a great online community to explore for your final project, not only because it is a social space for a specific group, but also because there seems to be some fairly strict regulations in place to maintain a safe environment for kids.
It might be interesting if you could find some weakness in its structure. For example can kids go into private chats or are all the chats and comment sections being screened. If they are being screened, is it by a computer generated logarithm or real people?
Another question that you could delve into is, how do the site’s administrators know the users are minors. Do they require parents’ permission? If so how do they prove it is actually a real parent?
I hope these suggestions are helpful. I am looking forward to seeing your finished project.
Best, Emily
EmiMac (talk) 00:13, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Name: Brooke Tjarks
Prospectus: Art. Business. Fans. (...) How this collaborative space shapes mass visual media production and worldwide distribution
Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Prospectus.Brooke.Tjarks.pdf
Name: Abby McHugh
Prospectus Title: From #Thinspiration to “Low Carb Friends”: The Regulation of Online Weight Loss Content
Link: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Amchugh_Assignment2.docx
Hi Abby!
Okay, so I really wich I had chosen this issue. It is great that you did!
To facilitate the work, I would recommend that you are more specific in which websites you are going to explore since there is so much #thinspo content out there. But Twitter, Tumbler, Pinterest, and Instagram are great platforms to explore, together with blogs like you said.
Other things you might want to discuss are:
What makes the most harm: #thinspo/pro-ana blogs and posts or limitations on freedom of speech by regulating such content? (On my part, I am determined in my opinion that #thinspo is devastating and that regulation in this case is a good thing.)
Who is active in this community?
Could pro-ana be illegitimate harassment? Compare it the possibility of a pro-cancer or a pro-aids community (deadly diseases just like anorexia).
What effects could/does the sometimes lack of regulation have on the community online and offline? Good luck! You´ve chosen a very interesting subject!
/Josefin
JosefinS (talk) 11:08, 5 March 2015 (EST)
Note: If I’m a little direct in the comments, I really mean the best. Hope it doesn’t offend anyone.
Ryan Hurley: I think professor said stay away from these huge websites. Perhaps you could discuss with the professors if Facebook is the right website to focus on?
Olivia Brinich: I think you’re asking a lot of questions to be answered here.
“How does it Pind and protect information, how do copyrighters choose to deal with the individual cases of copyright infringement, and what happens when a clip is wrongfully targeted for copyright violation, i.e., the adverse unintended consequences of Content ID?”
Perhaps you should just focus on one main thesis and explore on that. For example, focusing on how copyrighters deal with copyright infringement, and how that eventually influenced youtube to introduce copyright ID system.
One last issue is whether youtube is too big of a website to focus on. Perhaps you could narrow it down to say, copyright issues for music on youtube.
Erika L. Rich: I think it’s a very broad term to discuss the ethical considerations. Perhaps if you narrowed it down to 1 or 2 main issues you find extremely compelling about the website and community? Or maybe I have simply mistaken your train of thought.
Emily MacIntyre: I like how you had such conviction to talk about youtube that despite its size, its still worth researching about. I think you could also talk a little bit about how these game commentators earn their living by commenting on games. PewDiePie is estimated to earn millions every year. It could show a greater perspective on things if we could see their earnings as well. South Park actually has a very funny episode about commentators commenting on commentators commenting on games on youtube.
Matt K: Do you think that changing the title to reflect your research would make it easier for the reader? (Just a thought) I think its interesting how you mentioned “democratic instrument”, bringing politics into the way his blog is ran. According to the quote you took, Scalzi has indeed used some controls over potential commentators. Furthermore, you should consider that if it’s a blog about all sorts of things, with John’s comments on it, he should also be open to listen to commentators reply to this, especially if its about sensitive topics. If he’s going to filter away those he “considers” as offensive, then perhaps he shouldn’t comment on other things either. (unless the comment really does not have a valid point and is not related to the topic)
Edwin Duque: Good to see you in this class too. I think you should just focus on one website. I’d do JuryX instead of Facebook as professor said big websites aren’t good. Also, you’d need a stronger thesis to connect what the real question is. Is it about allowing free sharing? Or is it about limiting what gets shared? I’m a little confused with your thesis.
Chelly Byrne: I think you have a strong thesis here. The contradictions between sharing information on the internet, and the fear of being exposed would be very interesting. I think you can even go into the subscription process. I assume the website allows anyone to join. This means that even predators could read up on what victims write. Unfortunately, they probably get quite the entertainment from reading it, or pretending to ask “leading” questions. As you said, just a tiny bit of excessive information leaked out could result in a victim being violated again. I guess you could talk about that.
Chanel Rion: Since you’re talking about Yelp and reviews, I’d like to share what I learned from another class. Most of these reviews are at the ends of the spectrum. Unless someone is a regular of Yelp and does a review for every restaurant, the rest of them would be people who had great experiences or really bad experiences. They won’t be bothered to write a review about a mediocre or average restaurant. It’s not worth their time. You could also mention that. Also, do you think there are fake reviews too? I’d go for siteJabbar.
Becca Lewis: Firstly its interesting how you’re talking about Reddit because I’m talking about Digg. I think new beliefs takes time to be adapted by the masses. Feminism isn’t very old, and its on going. I think it takes time for people to adapt to it, so for the short term I won’t be surprised if the discussion board sees a lot of anti-feminism people. But also do bare in mind that these are “beliefs”, just like “liberalism” (which is quite similar to feminism, fighting for individual rights, etc). Not everyone believes in these values, so some disagreements should be expected. I guess an interesting way could be to examine if people become more offensive when they are shown as anonymous. My thoughts are that it is. You could look at reddit discussions compared with the core values of Wikipedia, and why it worked for Wikipedia, but a little hard for Reddit.
Gary Brown: Are there any data on the selection process, or ventures that were rejected? It’s hard to associate it with discrimination if there is no evidence. Since you can’t prove or disprove this, it means “site controls” cannot be determined. Therefore you need to make a new thesis that really reflects the paper.
Meagan Moana HoChing: DOTA is a fun game. My initial response is that with huge amounts of ego on the line, that’s how bullying start. Haha. From what I read and know, it is the architecture that is dominantly the issue. This structure allows the audience to exploit it. I think you could also investigate is how is “harassment” identified as? Calling someone a “loser”? Do note that a lot of cyber bullying are to kids that people know in real life. So can we causally say trash talking is the same as harassing? When NBA players trash talk one another, I don’t think they considered it as harassing. So I guess this definition needs to be very clear.
Caroline B: Perhaps you could mention NPOV as one of their values they used in order to keep readers like yourself going to the website.
Jan Yburan: Second Reddit I saw today. Haha. I think you need to be weary of the upvote system. More popular and famous people would get a self –fulfilling upvote treatment, where as more niche people or radical ones would get less. This way of identifying success might be a little questionable.
Alex Samaei: I’d be more interested in how kickstarter protects pledgers from potential false projects. This seems like a very good question for privacy and control.
Gia: “New scambaiters can request to be assigned a "mentor" to assist them in learning how to bait.”
I think this is really cool.
“. In the past, scammers were tricked into sending money themselves, which was later given to charity.”
That’s crazy. Not sure who the scammer is now. I’d spend more time discussing the aspect about scammers being scammed by scambaiters, and the moral and ethical implications of it.
Mishal R. Kennedy: I think you have a legit question there. Looking at whether deleting an old post or controlling spambots to be more important. You could also consider that perhaps it was the ease of registration that led to the spambots. Deleting the old posts doesn’t actually go to the root of the problem. I guess you could also talk more about the ease of registration.
Richard Markow: I think you should just talk about 1 or 2 points out of the 5. Don’t think you have enough space to write that much.
Alexander H: Do you think you could also go into the ease of account creation? To attain legitimacy, the website would need real personal data to determine that the petition is signed by a real person. If so the privacy concerns would be the biggest. A deeper look at the terms and agreement is a must.
Meredith Blake: That’s an interesting take on Yelp. I do believe that the reviews are either from the ones who enjoyed the restaurant the most, or the ones that hated it. The ones in the middle won’t be bothered to write a review.
Wesley Verge: Personally I think it is an inevitable part of anonymity and high view count. There’s bound to be a few trolls, but that too is what makes youtube entertaining. I think youtube just needs to make a better flagging system.
Kelly Wilson: You could talk about how the internet might influence more people to be whistleblowers, or even anonymous whistleblowers.
Tasha: I think to begin with you need to bare in mind that a lot of fitness people already know the difference between science and bro-science. I further believe that bodybuilding.com would just allow people to say whatever they want knowing full well it is just a forum. As long as they don’t endorse it, they shouldn’t be liable. But as such, you should also talk about the privacy of fitness people on the website. A lot of them post photos up too, and their diet and schedules.
Josefin S: Nice logo. I don’t really like the age range for kidzworld.com. It doesn’t make sense for 9 year olds to interact with 17 year olds. Furthermore, I wouldn’t want my 9 year old kid to socialize with 17 year old kids and being taught 17 year old stuff. So my biggest concern, as you also mentioned, is how do they keep content separate between different ages to prevent the younger kids to learn the wrong stuff? Or do they not do this at all?
Brooke Ashley Tjarks: Yes, I’d agree with you that IMDB is a good balance between the other two websites. I think by becoming a member, the legitimacy of the votes would become higher. There’s bound to be some sort of influence between people regardless of the platform, so I think IMDB is an interesting one to investigate further.
Amchugh: I think you could go into internet being free also has its consequences. Since the internet could edit and post something online in a matter of seconds, it becomes very vulnerable for unintended things to hit the net. The filtering has to either occurred before the posting, or after it has been up. When it’s up already, it’s hard to say whether the rest of them would oblige, or would they prefer to continue the troll game. You could talk about the reasons for why Twitter would take it down (assuming that it does not violate Twitter’s policies).
Note: Good luck everyone!