RE: Is there a more useless metric than reputation?

I suspect, strongly, that reputation will work much better for communities than for individuals. The base is obviously much broader and the willingness to circle jerk much lower.

I do too, which is why I made note to mention it. I think that there can be two layers (more as well) where a community is able to build a reputation for itself by being able to attract high reputation users, then based on the discussion/ content /etc, more layers of confidence can be applied.

A more useless number than reputation on Hive? I'd suggest the membership number. Everybody that has ever joined is counted as a member. Every account is a member. Way less than 10% of that number actually participate in any way on a monthly basis. Just logging in is considered activity.

Nice one!! Yeah - this might indeed be more useless, considering there are some people with thousands of accounts :)

Society has a funny reputation parameter. When you consider that doctors are held in near universal regard despite the fact that half of them are below average. Politicians are generally held in low regard despite the fact that half of them are above average.

And, both groups are among the most educated among us in a culture that generally values education. People don't think too much about these things though, we just base our opinions on what we see, without considering that for the most part, we have never met the individuals, we are given the view.

The HF was delayed to make sure as many of the apps are able to get up and running immediately, as many hadn't checked in to say if they had tested with Eclipse yet. The delay isn't ideal, but I think it is better than a lot of application failures that would be considered a failed HF - even if the HF runs smoothly.

!ENGAGE 20