Repute: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
(noting stigma vs. honour) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''This article is about repute in [[web service]] settings. The term reputation is usually assumed to be an equivalent, but has rather broader meaning. '''Stigma''' usually means negative repute, '''honour''' means positive repute.'' | ''This article is about repute in [[web service]] settings. The term reputation is usually assumed to be an equivalent, but has rather broader meaning. '''Stigma''' usually means negative repute, '''honour''' means positive repute.'' | ||
'''Repute''' is [[value]] associated with some [[identity]]. It is really an [[ethics]] concept that becomes visible as a measure of [[social capital]]. In general there is no such thing as bad repute, if the identity can be discarded or changed, as it can in almost all [[troll]] situations. If one has a repute one wishes to discard, one simply discards the identity and starts over. In [[wiki management]] this is called the [[right to vanish]], and is a key issue in both [[surveillance and governance]] of especially [[large public wiki]]s where there are very often many [[users in conflict]]. Lack of this "right" can lead to [[social exclusion]] in some circumstances. | '''Repute''' is [[value]] associated with some [[identity]]. It is really an [[ethics]] concept that becomes visible as a measure of [[social capital]]. In general there is no such thing as bad repute, if the identity can be discarded or changed, as it can in almost all [[troll]] situations. If one has a repute one wishes to discard, one simply discards the identity and starts over. In [[wiki management]] this is called the [[right to vanish]], and is a key issue in both [[surveillance and governance]] of especially [[large public wiki]]s where there are very often many [[users in conflict]]. Lack of this "right" or '''social status''' can lead to [[social exclusion]] in some circumstances. | ||
Some think that because negative reputation is so hard to make stick to anyone, and because positive '''reputation''' enables so many abuses and is easily distorted or constructed by falsehood, the whole concept of reputation is negative and only enables those capable of promotion regardless of any [[value]]s. Others think that this can be managed but only when reputation itself is always negative, and no one can ever have a good reputation (i.e. reputation is expressed as zero or some negative number, a [[score]] on the [[identity]]). This kind of question is basic to [[social capital]] and [[trademark]] issues. | Some think that because negative reputation is so hard to make stick to anyone, and because positive '''reputation''' enables so many abuses and is easily distorted or constructed by falsehood, the whole concept of reputation is negative and only enables those capable of promotion regardless of any [[value]]s. Others think that this can be managed but only when reputation itself is always negative, and no one can ever have a good reputation (i.e. reputation is expressed as zero or some negative number, a [[score]] on the [[identity]]). This kind of question is basic to [[social capital]] and [[trademark]] issues. | ||