. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

{ Tuesday, December 30, 2008 }

Permission Structures

Oddly enough, the Andre's description of how he'd like Flickr's permission structure to work is the way it originally worked, and, frankly, didn't work. It was based on the relationships we'd developed for Game Neverending: Acquaintance, Friend, Best Friend, Soulmate -- there was another level between Best Friend and Soulmate (or Friend and Best Friend) but now I don't remember what it was. Orkut, in their original version, did a similar concentric friends circle and we knew it wouldn't be long before they rewrote it. We launched the later version assigning users to groups just before or just after Orkut did theirs.

The best permission structure, I think, was done by Vimeo -- permission by group, or by individual, or by password. Nice.

LINK | 3:58 PM | TB

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

  { COMMENTS }

Now that you mentioned it, I really miss GN.

Happy New Year!

Joy | December 30, 2008 11:07 PM

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

alongside a permissions model, is the subscription model, which I think Vimeo also nailed.

I can follow someone's content without implying that I am socially connected to them, and visa versa. The only thing missing is the transparency here, I cannot see the list of who subscribes to my content. Why would I want to? To discover mutual tastes and potential new friends.

Perhaps vimeo liked the idea of keeping the ability to subscribe anonymously around... but there should be transparent counter-part to this also. "Subscribe and let them know!" (reciprocation entirely optional)

clickykbd | December 31, 2008 5:04 AM

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

and "enemy".

don't forget "enemy", that was the best one!

striatic | January 4, 2009 8:50 PM

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

the "enemy" designation made online antagonism seem practically comical.

part of what made GNE and early flickr interesting was how the terminology and structure put the nature of online interaction into perspective in such a sly, witty way... even if some of the structures ended up being ultimately impractical.

striatic | January 5, 2009 3:13 PM

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hooray for enemies! I'll try to work enemies into another piece of social software.

..but what the hell was the other mid-friend designation? Have been racking (wracking?) my brains.

Caterina | January 5, 2009 7:26 PM

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Great post Caterina - hadn't seen Andre's, so thanks for the find.

(and I think it's 'racking your brains')...

Salim Ismail | January 18, 2009 2:19 PM

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

{ Post a comment }
















. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .