Jump to content

Grown trust: Difference between revisions

1,121 bytes added ,  23 August 2004
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.
Anonymous user
We use only those cookies necessary for the functioning of the website.