I've been thinking about this a lot ever since I first picked up Eclipse Phase, and I don't know if I completely buy it. I don't see a lot of examples in the present day that aren't super niche; once a social network platform reaches critical mass, it seems like it can support a range of subcommunities with diverse ideological stances.
Are there any modern-day analogues to EP rep networks?
In the context of EP rep networks, would Facebook be a network?
Is reddit a single network, or a collection of networks divided along ideological lines? Or is each subreddit a network?
Is 4chan a network? Or is it a collection of boards that are each an individual network?
Are rep networks possibly just an abstraction?
Maybe I'm just thinking about it the wrong way, but the more I think about how rep networks are portrayed the less sense it seems to make. Anyone have any insights?
—
Thermonuclear Banana Split - A not-really-weekly Eclipse Phase campaign journal.
- You don't gain or lose rep solely through performing actions like "tips". It's also based on how much people like you. You could have performed lots of vital services but the moment you get into a public argument where you're seen as sympathetic to Hypercorps, your rep tanks. People are not, so far as I am aware, confined to only associating rep votes to specific actions. They can give or remove Rep for any reason at any time. If you're an outsider to their group, that's likely a far greater factor than what tasks you perform. It still comes down to popularity. Only way out of that is for rep not to be something people can freely give or take.
- Even within the tipping system as you view it, it still gets weighted by who you are. The pretty waitresses get a lot more tips than the ugly ones. The ones who flirt get more tips than those that don't. Ask a waitress if you've never been one! And similarly, the person who agrees with your politics and values is going to be better rewarded than the one who is viewed as "Not one of us". Why? Because that's human nature and because - as the poster above talking about Game Theory observed - you don't want to give power to your rivals. "It's hard being a bioconservative in this world - you have to work twice as hard for half the respect." Bias exists in a capitalist system often enough, but in this one it's completely let off the leash.
- It costs the giver nothing to give and nothing to take away. If you give someone money, that is money you no longer have. If you give someone an upvote, there's no reason not to. The effect of that would require some thought, but I think the likely consequence is an extreme disparity in Rep. When giving has a cost to people, that acts as a dampener on wild variations. Without it, I expect a "lottery winner" model of reputation. Similarly the ability to rapidly tank rep combines with this to make a very Boom and Bust effect common with people's Rep.
- Is how people assign Rep public knowledge? Or even just obtainable? If so - and I think by the way Rep is described as working it is necessarily so - it leads to ghettoization and social segregation. Look at our own world where even being associated with the latest Bette Noir forces people to rush out and distance themselves from him or her, leads to their own media profile being heavily damaged. If you're giving Rep to someone regarded as bad, you're enabling and supporting that person. It's even worse than paying them money for some service because Rep is optional - it's a personal statement that you approve of this person. The consequence of this is that if someone does something unpopular, there's a cascading withdrawal of rep. This combines with the previous reason that Rep will be subject to wild swings.
- Wild swings in your 'income' make long term planning and tasks extremely difficult.
Your analogy is to waitresses. I fear a society in which we are all waitresses. If you've ever been a waitress, you'll probably be of the opinion that working for tips sucks. Because it does. Well, money isn't a perfect analogue but by my reading and inference, rep systems are the former. The latter is inaccurate because there is no money in the system and what you do have doesn't function as money. Yes, I'm aware it's a "post-scarcity" economy. Everything I wrote was on that basis. However, regarding the extrapolations you've made from that. (1) People trying to do a "straight-up work trade" are competing with an existing economic system. You can go to someone and say "I want to trade me doing this for you doing that" but what's in it for them? If someone did that to you in real life wouldn't you by default just say "I'll pay someone to do it?" The reason money evolved is because barter is highly awkward and time consuming and inefficient. Sure, there's nothing stopping you from going to an artist and saying "I want you to make me a sculpture. I'm a bouncer and I'll trade my services," but maybe they don't need a bouncer. What are you going to do? Find someone who does and get them to agree to host a party at their club for yet another person who happens to have an antique watch from Earth that the sculptor wants so they can give it to the person who owns the club that employs you as a bouncer to give to the sculptor who swallowed a spider... Direct work trade is fine in the abstract, but think it through - your work trades have to compete with a much more efficient and established economic system that the sculptor already uses. If you're not popular, you have insurmountable obstacles that can't realistically be got around with work trade. An advanced society means specialised skills. Specialised skills mean barter is not feasible. (2) (Yes, there's more! ;) . You say there is no way to track "negative Rep". It's true the game system measures things as 0 and up. But I don't think that's plausible. Everything is relative. Even if you say there is nothing below 0, it will settle at a mid-point. You can say "but our rep system goes to 11", but everything is relative. So I think everything I wrote stands up to examination. And [I]obviously[/I] I am aware this is a "post-scarcity" system. I have read the same books you have! ;) Honestly, being non-American and seeing how things work for waitresses in the USA (living off tips rather than a wage), likening rep networks to being "like a waitress" doesn't do much to alleviate my view of it as a dystopia. Tying purchasing power to popularity is pretty scary to me.