Absolutely, My energies are directed towards promoting the advantages I see In a Collective Intelligence. One aspect with CI is anonymity. Others are transparency and a rigorous application of logic and reason. How will they clamp down on a faceless segment of society that shows the logic In the conclusions they have adopted in a transparent and unbiased way. Everything opposite of what the power structures engage in. What if alternative media could morph into a public forum moderated not by individuals and their biases but moderated by logic and our ability to collaborate through technology. Every part of bias we remove goes into the trustworthiness ledger. We could cover the topics we saw as important and place them in a format that does not yield to casual dismissal via demonizing. Present a better product. Can’t say it all in one post please see: https://steemit.com/collective-intelligence/@cmw/decentralized-thought
antimedia, here is a copy of a reply I made to @bifilarcoil on one of @caitlinjohnstone post. I hope it relates to your post.
Not sure again right off. I would like to give it some thought. I have always been fond of questionnaires . This is more than that though. This is taking the replies to the questionnaires and organizing the replies or rather having the participants organize the replies. It may be a questionnaire concerning the questionnaire. As soon as possible, it needs to steer towards a collective, anonymous effort. So a question is how do the instigators transition and where? Like I said, It will take some thought. It may require a hang out of some sort Really though you could do a lot with just a questionnaire that builds upon itself. If you could as a question like “what is your greatest concern and why”, on a specific topic or in general. Then go deeper and ask questions (not sure what) concerning the “why” answers because those are the replies that address the logic and that is what this is all about, utilizing logic, freeing logic from human abuse. If you could actually create a very basic collaboration that incorporates logic as the moderator. I think that sums it up. It is all about applying the one thing always left out or distorted in human dialog; human logic and reasoning and negating those things always present, human selfishness and self-serving opportunities. If done in a way that created something new and unique,.people might think that was kind of cool. If there was an alternative to angry debate, where you did not have to defend your conclusion because the conclusion defended itself, sounds crazy I know. I kind of want to think about it awhile. Don’t want to take a step In the wrong direction or not be able to change course if needed. I think small and very simple is the key at first. This may give more insight, it may become evident where to go as you move along if you keep the goals in mind. This all seems kind of crazy and complex but compared to the world we live in it pales. And yes humor is awesome and I wish we had more of it. Maybe if we can show in a logical, anonymous, unbiased way how insane the arguments are sometimes. This is the basis of some humor is it not. Showing how something is illogical. It is just that when https://steemit.com/@hagoodman does it he is immediately a target for alleged bias and self-interest, so it only penetrates so far into society and reaches a certain audience. Again my hope is that Collective intelligence defined as anonymous, transparent and proven logic applied to real concerns will be like an ice-breaker and go where alternative media cannot. Hey thanks again for reply. Throw it around with others. It we keep at it we may get somewhere.
I agree. Opposition incentives multiplication and improvement.
MAYBE OR MAYBE NOT ! ONLY TIME WILL TELL US WHICH ONE FROM THOSE ARE TRUE
Absolutely, My energies are directed towards promoting the advantages I see In a Collective Intelligence. One aspect with CI is anonymity. Others are transparency and a rigorous application of logic and reason. How will they clamp down on a faceless segment of society that shows the logic In the conclusions they have adopted in a transparent and unbiased way. Everything opposite of what the power structures engage in. What if alternative media could morph into a public forum moderated not by individuals and their biases but moderated by logic and our ability to collaborate through technology. Every part of bias we remove goes into the trustworthiness ledger. We could cover the topics we saw as important and place them in a format that does not yield to casual dismissal via demonizing. Present a better product. Can’t say it all in one post please see: https://steemit.com/collective-intelligence/@cmw/decentralized-thought
antimedia, here is a copy of a reply I made to @bifilarcoil on one of @caitlinjohnstone post. I hope it relates to your post.
Not sure again right off. I would like to give it some thought. I have always been fond of questionnaires . This is more than that though. This is taking the replies to the questionnaires and organizing the replies or rather having the participants organize the replies. It may be a questionnaire concerning the questionnaire. As soon as possible, it needs to steer towards a collective, anonymous effort. So a question is how do the instigators transition and where? Like I said, It will take some thought. It may require a hang out of some sort Really though you could do a lot with just a questionnaire that builds upon itself. If you could as a question like “what is your greatest concern and why”, on a specific topic or in general. Then go deeper and ask questions (not sure what) concerning the “why” answers because those are the replies that address the logic and that is what this is all about, utilizing logic, freeing logic from human abuse. If you could actually create a very basic collaboration that incorporates logic as the moderator. I think that sums it up. It is all about applying the one thing always left out or distorted in human dialog; human logic and reasoning and negating those things always present, human selfishness and self-serving opportunities. If done in a way that created something new and unique,.people might think that was kind of cool. If there was an alternative to angry debate, where you did not have to defend your conclusion because the conclusion defended itself, sounds crazy I know. I kind of want to think about it awhile. Don’t want to take a step In the wrong direction or not be able to change course if needed. I think small and very simple is the key at first. This may give more insight, it may become evident where to go as you move along if you keep the goals in mind. This all seems kind of crazy and complex but compared to the world we live in it pales. And yes humor is awesome and I wish we had more of it. Maybe if we can show in a logical, anonymous, unbiased way how insane the arguments are sometimes. This is the basis of some humor is it not. Showing how something is illogical. It is just that when https://steemit.com/@hagoodman does it he is immediately a target for alleged bias and self-interest, so it only penetrates so far into society and reaches a certain audience. Again my hope is that Collective intelligence defined as anonymous, transparent and proven logic applied to real concerns will be like an ice-breaker and go where alternative media cannot. Hey thanks again for reply. Throw it around with others. It we keep at it we may get somewhere.
I just upvoted You! Reply STOP to stop automatic upvotes
🙌🏼This. Keeping it positive!