Do we need Rival Social Networks?
These are just "snippets" from a Whitepaper that I am posting in the hope of getting feedback, so I can use peoples opinions to alter my Whitepaper... So far, I have made changes as people have changed my ideas and opinions with some valid comments that I could not ignore...
- Why Rival Social Networks
The main problem with Current Social Network Platforms is that decision making is very singular and it remains that case for most of its lifetime.
For a long time now, Social Network Platforms are emerging, promising decentralization, rewards for everyone and complete harmonious bliss, except for their bottom line and users ability to use the system.
There is NOTHING wrong with Centralization, as long as its fair
There is NOTHING wrong with letting people use their own responsibility to view content and not to view content.
It is simple things like this that creates individuality and sparks new ideas...
There is NOTHING wrong with Advertising, as long as its fair
There is NOTHING wrong with having a "BOSS" that controls the business of managing a Platform.
The Difference is, that every Manager (BOSS), has a Year to prove their worth to the Community, who are the shareholders and if they dont, the Community can vote in someone else.
We dont need to alter the way things are done just for the convenience of "independence", because that can be built into the system, without making people jump through hoops, just to use a platform...
All we are really proposing to do is change the Management/CEO process to go from an individual or small group to making the Community in complete charge.
Also, since the Community are ALL MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS, then the efforts of making profits alter to suit the majority, since there is no longer the minority (traditional shareholders).
