Web 3.0 now
Just a year and a half ago, our Russian definition of the term “web 2.0” appeared. According to network journalist Andreev, web 2.0 is described by Mark Twain in the notorious scene with Tom Sawyer (read the owner of the portal), to whom friends (read - users) paint the fence (read, create free content for which the creator would have to spend money and force). Is this a fair situation? Of course not. It is in this injustice that they see the imperfections of the web 2.0-communities and predict the era of Webtrinol.
Scheme of work of Webtrinol:
1. The user creates the content.
')
2. Readers go to the site, read the content, evaluate the content posted on the pages of the site, view ads.
3. The estimate and the number of views of each material are the coefficients by which the user's benefit is calculated. The coefficient also affects how long the user has been working with this resource, how many materials he has published, what the average rating is for materials in the entire history of user publications and whether he has additional tasks on the site. So, a user can be a moderator of a section, solve controversial situations, play the role of a tutor - and receive a pay increase for all this.
4. The total incomes of the creator of the community are divided into two parts: half it keeps for itself, half divides between users according to the "salary" coefficient of each of them.
Why is this scheme beneficial to the creator of the resource?
1. The creator of the resource does not need advertising. Users will independently actively advertise the resource (and, of course, their own publications) through other communities, LJ, social media to increase the clickability, readability and rating of their articles.
2. The creator does not need an editor. Users will care about the quality of the content, as low-quality content will be less popular. Low-quality content lowers the overall rating of the user, so he will avoid low-quality content and strive to maintain his position on the resource.
3. The creator does not need moderators. The role of moderators will be performed by users both independently (to lower the rating of users who, for example, have used an obscene word), and for this increase in the salary ratio.
4. The creator does not need project managers. Because it will be a self-organized community, the goal of which will be survival and development (that is, making more money by each member of the community), winning in competition with similar communities.
In general, all that is necessary for the creator in this situation is the initial promotion of the service and the provision of its physical activity (server, hosting, etc.)
I can argue, monetized social networks in Russia will appear within two years.
Will wait.
PS This post was published earlier in my blog on blogs.technet.com/ilyae
and I decided to share my thoughts also with users of Habr.
Scheme of work of Webtrinol:
1. The user creates the content.
')
2. Readers go to the site, read the content, evaluate the content posted on the pages of the site, view ads.
3. The estimate and the number of views of each material are the coefficients by which the user's benefit is calculated. The coefficient also affects how long the user has been working with this resource, how many materials he has published, what the average rating is for materials in the entire history of user publications and whether he has additional tasks on the site. So, a user can be a moderator of a section, solve controversial situations, play the role of a tutor - and receive a pay increase for all this.
4. The total incomes of the creator of the community are divided into two parts: half it keeps for itself, half divides between users according to the "salary" coefficient of each of them.
Why is this scheme beneficial to the creator of the resource?
1. The creator of the resource does not need advertising. Users will independently actively advertise the resource (and, of course, their own publications) through other communities, LJ, social media to increase the clickability, readability and rating of their articles.
2. The creator does not need an editor. Users will care about the quality of the content, as low-quality content will be less popular. Low-quality content lowers the overall rating of the user, so he will avoid low-quality content and strive to maintain his position on the resource.
3. The creator does not need moderators. The role of moderators will be performed by users both independently (to lower the rating of users who, for example, have used an obscene word), and for this increase in the salary ratio.
4. The creator does not need project managers. Because it will be a self-organized community, the goal of which will be survival and development (that is, making more money by each member of the community), winning in competition with similar communities.
In general, all that is necessary for the creator in this situation is the initial promotion of the service and the provision of its physical activity (server, hosting, etc.)
I can argue, monetized social networks in Russia will appear within two years.
Will wait.
PS This post was published earlier in my blog on blogs.technet.com/ilyae
and I decided to share my thoughts also with users of Habr.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/20658/
All Articles