Grown trust: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(remove nonsense paragraph) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Activists exploit grown trust heavily. They organize events where they will be literally forced to trust each other, like a [[trade protest]], and so grow new trust that is not simply that which was built through co-operating in the plans. | Activists exploit grown trust heavily. They organize events where they will be literally forced to trust each other, like a [[trade protest]], and so grow new trust that is not simply that which was built through co-operating in the plans. | ||
Attempting to interfere with grown trust is one of the most common mistakes a [[sysop]] makes. Often those in positions of trust with the [[sysop power structure]] interfere with pairwise relationships between people (either online or offline) who just happened to meet through a system, on the grounds that it is interfering with [[built trust]] or the system itself. For instance, people who simply happen to agree on some issue may be accused of conspiracy - or even of "being the same person", such claims interfering with the trust between them and others. | |||
The [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] should be quite aware of the consequences of interfering with the natural growth of trust between people who collaborate with [[common interests]], and through this discover [[common values]]. It should be specifically conservative about [[outing]] or any other practices which deliberately attempt to interfere with grown trust that happened to grow with the help of [[Consumerium Services]]. The CGO does not own this trust, does not control it, and should not deem itself fit to dispose of it at will. | |||