Isn't the early community going distort the views? Isn't there going to be shared bias?


#1

No one is not biased. Everyone is shaped by their experiences and has some sort of world view. Some might be more open-minded than others but that doesn’t mean they don’t have a tinge in their thoughts and opinions. The solution isn’t to find neutral people because 1) they don’t exist and 2) they are actually counter-productive to TruStory. The solution is to find a diverse selection of passionate people who can offer different perspectives. And TruStory will be the facilitator of proper discourse between them.

Shared bias presents an issue not within a specific category but across categories. Because we are starting with cryptocurrency claims first, there is going to be a higher percentage of pro-cryptocurrency people on the plaform than in the real world. They might have their own biases about nutrition or politics that could bleed into curating other topics. How we’re handling this is the same way we’re handling the current community- carefully selecting the early users based on their intrinsic motivation and integrity.


#2

Yes. Echoing @priyatham. It’s our job to build a ethical community with a diverse set of view. That is what we think about day in and day out.


#3

Okay so the early community will be filtered by your very own bias and then with this bias reinforced by the community built upon it will filter the future applicants? :wink:

Who first of all would not won’t to apply to a community with certain bias that would seem to be not compatible to theirs; then these who do apply might get rejected; then these who got through will be too “toxic” (i.e. with a bias too incompatible to the set of biases that has been groomed in the community; plus they will be very active as they’ve managed to get through the filters) so the community will /subconsciously/ work towards driving them out by proving their claims wrong and so on.

I’m not saying that that’s what will happen but are you sure that you’ll get enough different POVs to gather different pieces of the puzzles?

Ethical is great, as too many communities out these are turned into sewers by the “non-ethical” people (although I guess they would just define “ethical” differently).

The problem here is … many of these who would have priceless pieces of info and evidence for various facts, they just won’t be “ethical” from this community’s POV so they won’t submit their facts and the stories will get skewed etc.

By that I’m surely not proposing to invite here all criminals and internet trolls etc :slight_smile:
Still, probably it’s important to remember that without their “unethical” POVs (and the facts that only they have/can provide) many of the puzzles won’t really be complete and hence the whole picture won’t be possible.

Maybe I’m missing something here but overall it seems that the diverse set of views will have serious limitations even when the community grows beyond the initial crypto crowd (or when the whole world grows up to become that crowd), as some views will prove to be too diverse :wink: , or the people with various valuable and not too radical views would be culturally too different to play by the rules of an “ethical community” as they would actually consider these rules to be unethical from their POVs.


#4

The same question holds true for a multitude of platforms that we use today – be it Reddit, Quora, or Wikipedia. All of these had some early users who were, in the beginning, only discussing certain topics and might have held very specific views on these.
Whenever we speak about businesses or communities that work on networks, there are two things that I believe are essential pre-requisites for ensuring the right escape velocity for things to take off, be it sanctity, confirmation, usability and sustainability

 Network effects
 Test of time (aka Lindy effect, used by Mr. N.N. Taleb)
In our context…
Network effect -
A standard in economic evaluation, but this holds true for information dissemination/discussion platforms. As more people flow in to a news platform or discussion forums (for e.g.), the range of ‘opinions’ will increase – however, if the users flocking to the platform continues to increase, it is a strong signal of quality, variability and reliability, all of which signal increase in interest for non-users. Thus, increasing usage will further normalize content/opinion i.e. content might range in extremes for some topics (for e.g. crypto ban in India) while could be consistent for others (for e.g. # of bitcoins mined by 2140). With this normalization, more users will flock to the platform (stronger network effects) and thus we enter perpetual normalization mode, further ensuring stronger (diversity + quality + reliability)

To summarize – Network effects mean outcome upsides when additional users/customers come in. For content curation platforms (such as TruStory), if participants keep on increasing, it can solve for content reliability, opinion diversity and quality

Test of time aka Lindy effect
Lindy effect is a concept that the future life expectancy of some non-perishable things like a technology or an idea is proportional to their current age, so that every additional period of survival implies a longer remaining life expectancy (coined by Mr. NN Taleb in his writing)

In our context, if Trustory keeps on surviving i.e. keeps on building a community with a unified ambition over longer periods of time, it sustains for a longer time in future. The longer it sustains in future, longer is the pursuit for network effects and the implied benefits network effects can bring in.

Test of time will ensure users are liking the platform, enjoying the community, come here often to get their ‘crypto health check’ and in nutshell, are well incentivized in their relationship with TruStory. To summarize, I think with time and more users, the problem will solve for itself. Lindy is very critical though.


#5

Any new system is prone to start of with some bias from the developers and initial users but that is the cost of traction that they need to pay.If TruStory is able to get its further users from all walks, the initial bias can be removed in the longer run.From my understanding of working of TruStory, they allow the option of changing votes on a particular post.So,the future users(gained organically) can vote on previous posts with bias and be able to refute the claim terminating inherent biases in the network.