Conflicts at collective sites: possible solutions
By providing easy access from different places at any time to collective sites, the Internet, firstly, intensified social interactions. Secondly, what is more important in this case, easy access was received by different people. Often, they are even too different - according to their level of education, age, interests, social status, wealth, and so on. Conflicts are common to human groups, but these two factors exacerbate the problem.
What are possible ways of its if not solutions, then at least mitigation? The path is essentially the same and it is traditional - the audience is segmented into different platforms, grouped according to common features. But there are two realizations of this path - one is also traditional, when the platforms are objectively different - they have different URLs, different positioning, functionality, and so on.
The second seems to be less traditional, in some aspects it has been used for a long time, but I have not yet met full-fledged options - when the difference exists only in the perception of the participants through the appropriate individual settings for the "visibility" of content generated by other participants. For example, you create your personal “black” list of people, all posts and comments of which you will not see at all. At the same time, you will be in the same space with them and some of the other users will see these posts, just as they will react to them. At the same time, it solves the problem of a ban, because communities are rarely completely unanimous about banning someone. Of course, there are possible options - for example, not to see all the posts of such and such a participant, except those marked with such a tag. Or not to see his texts, except when they caused a great response in the community. Either the response to you personally significant people - in the choice of options there is where to turn fantasy.
')
Not only content can be perceived individually, but also section titles for its appearance, too. For example, the names of any section of the forum all its members will see in their own way, according to their tastes and preferences.
I would call it the concept of “subjectively different sites”.
What are possible ways of its if not solutions, then at least mitigation? The path is essentially the same and it is traditional - the audience is segmented into different platforms, grouped according to common features. But there are two realizations of this path - one is also traditional, when the platforms are objectively different - they have different URLs, different positioning, functionality, and so on.
The second seems to be less traditional, in some aspects it has been used for a long time, but I have not yet met full-fledged options - when the difference exists only in the perception of the participants through the appropriate individual settings for the "visibility" of content generated by other participants. For example, you create your personal “black” list of people, all posts and comments of which you will not see at all. At the same time, you will be in the same space with them and some of the other users will see these posts, just as they will react to them. At the same time, it solves the problem of a ban, because communities are rarely completely unanimous about banning someone. Of course, there are possible options - for example, not to see all the posts of such and such a participant, except those marked with such a tag. Or not to see his texts, except when they caused a great response in the community. Either the response to you personally significant people - in the choice of options there is where to turn fantasy.
')
Not only content can be perceived individually, but also section titles for its appearance, too. For example, the names of any section of the forum all its members will see in their own way, according to their tastes and preferences.
I would call it the concept of “subjectively different sites”.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/101222/
All Articles