Talk:User data: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
*has someone they buy for who has a wheat allergy | *has someone they buy for who has a wheat allergy | ||
*won't buy any fish that is not [[dolphin safe]] and doesn't care that there are problems with this [[standard label]] | *won't buy any fish that is not [[dolphin safe]] and doesn't care that there are problems with this [[standard label]] | ||
*believes [[mandatory label]]s should be on [[GMO]]s and will therefore want to know if any GMOs are present, and not to buy from companies who have lobbied against GMO mandatory labelling, or who have promoted export of GMO seed to any [[developing nation]] without the expertise to evaluate it | *believes [[mandatory label]]s should be on [[GMO]]s and will therefore want to know if any GMOs are or might be present (yellow light with details), and not to buy from companies who have lobbied against GMO mandatory labelling, or who have promoted export of GMO seed to any [[developing nation]] without the expertise to evaluate it | ||
*trusts [[Greens]] [[faction]] in [[content wiki]] to resolve [[factionally defined]] concerns | *trusts [[Greens]] [[faction]] in [[content wiki]] to resolve [[factionally defined]] concerns - thus wants to see [[green light]] if Greens approve of a product, [[yellow light]] if any Green has raised any concern, and wants [[red light]] not yellow if a [[consensus]] of [[Greens]] rejects the product itself. | ||
*trusts [[Pinks]] [[faction]] to decide what [[slavery]] actually is | *trusts [[Pinks]] [[faction]] to decide what [[slavery]] and [[child labour]] actually are, instead of Greens - override Green consensus even on green light and raise yellow with the details instead | ||
*trusts [[Reds]] [[faction]] to decide what constitutes [[prison labour]], instead of Greens - override Green consensus and raise yellow with details" | |||
Obviously, this is just an English expression of what's actually in the database, which will be more like a form. For instance, the decision to punish companies involved in GMO lobbying might be expressed as a more general preference on influencing corporate behaviour, which just happens only to apply to this issue, since there are no corporate advocates of say slavery or prison labour. At least, no explicit ones. ;-) | |||
We really need some examples of user data gathering forms to start working on. | |||
We actually need more [[user data]] than we can really act on, and we need to know at least something about context and intent, so that the [[Consumerium developers]] always know which buying criteria are in broad demand and need to be supported next - this is the only way to balance [[faction]] [[ideology]] to make this kind of decision. | We actually need more [[user data]] than we can really act on, and we need to know at least something about context and intent, so that the [[Consumerium developers]] always know which buying criteria are in broad demand and need to be supported next - this is the only way to balance [[faction]] [[ideology]] to make this kind of decision. | ||
Such a profile might not all exist in a database, but some of these assertions may be scattered around the [[opinion wiki]] or talk pages in [[content wiki]]. In general we should not be shy about compiling all that is revealed by any end user in one place, if only so they know it's revealed, and can edit it if it's not right, or if they change their mind. [[Large public wiki]]s very often run into huge potential [[libel]] problems by letting [[sysop]]s or overly enthusiastic users talk about others' motives and make up adjectives to describe others' statements. This sort of thing must be strictly forbidden by [[Consumerium Governance Organization]], it's actually worse even than [[outing]]. | Such a profile might not all exist in a database, but some of these assertions may be scattered around the [[opinion wiki]] or talk pages in [[content wiki]]. In general we should not be shy about compiling all that is revealed by any end user in one place, if only so they know it's revealed, and can edit it if it's not right, or if they change their mind. [[Large public wiki]]s very often run into huge potential [[libel]] problems by letting [[sysop]]s or overly enthusiastic users talk about others' motives and make up adjectives to describe others' statements. This sort of thing must be strictly forbidden by [[Consumerium Governance Organization]], it's actually worse even than [[outing]]. | ||