?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Making Social Networking better, part 2

As I was saying...

Relationships can be established by finding any other user on the site and adding them as an acquaintance.  Relationships are uni-directional; they do not need acknowledgment.  When a relationship is established, a message will be sent to the person who is being added, giving them the option to become an acquaintance in return.  Becoming an acquaintance can actually serve to provide additional access or further restrict access if you choose.  For example, if a stalker adds you as an acquaintance, you have the option to add them back and then add them to an ackle group which the user can arbitrarily call 'assholes', and then add the rule 'assholes: deny' to any ackle.

When a relationship is added, it is treated like any other piece of information.  The existence of the relationship will have its own ackle, permitting or denying others from seeing that the relationship exists.

For convenience purposes, ackles can receive arbitrary, user-determined names and thereby be re-used.  If an ackle name is used for setting restrictions on any piece of information, updating the rules within that named ackle will automatically change restrictions on any piece of information that uses that named ackle.  Because of this, modifying a named ackle will automatically prompt a user to determine whether they want to actually modify the ackle or to create a copy of the ackle and associate it with a new name.

At any time, a user can review all pieces of information that are affected by named ackles.

At any time, a user can view their own information as if they were any other user, in order to review and verify that the correct information and only the correct information is being presented.


I _think_ this is the end of my discussion on accounts and access.  Again, I'm out of time, and will begin a new entry to discuss how entries are managed.

Comments

( 3 comments — Leave a comment )
(Anonymous)
Mar. 12th, 2010 02:27 am (UTC)
as a pseudo-geek, I understand your concept, but unless you can make it simple for ma & pa kettle to use, it will never fly :-/ and ACLs are just too complex for many people to grasp the concept.
benevg
Mar. 12th, 2010 07:04 am (UTC)
what the above comment said.

heck, i grasp the idea and find it would be annoying to actually use on a social networking site. managing those ACLs would suck all my fun out of it :)

you would need a really *really* good set of defaults, and even then ease of use does not sound like something you want to present to the average joe. maybe it could be made to work if what you describe was an "advanced" version of everything. with big warning letters in red: "this will give you lots and lots of options, but at the cost of asking lots and lots of you" ;)
stigant
Mar. 12th, 2010 11:02 am (UTC)
As I said on the previous post, there are suites of software to handle the mess that ACLs created on Windows 2000. Average people lack the patience or the expertise or both to use ACLs. Facebook's system may not be perfect in the sense that it doesn't have as much flexibility as a full blown ACL system, but, for most people, it provides a nice balance between flexibility and usability. Obviously, you're not most people.
( 3 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

xsg
XSG - 1 G 2 Many
miscreants 3.0

Latest Month

June 2010
S M T W T F S
  12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930   

Tags

Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Teresa Jones