<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How to fix building construction bureaucracy</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mattmcalister.com/blog/2007/05/31/178/how-to-fix-building-construction-bureaucracy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mattmcalister.com/blog/2007/05/31/178/how-to-fix-building-construction-bureaucracy/</link>
	<description>Inside Online Media</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 03:30:52 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris B</title>
		<link>http://www.mattmcalister.com/blog/2007/05/31/178/how-to-fix-building-construction-bureaucracy/#comment-53267</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2007 22:40:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattmcalister.com/blog/2007/05/31/178/how-to-fix-building-construction-bureaucracy/#comment-53267</guid>
		<description>Yeah, yeah - if only we'd all be able to hug each other through the internet and sing kum-bye-yah, etc.  You, sir, have hit one of my pet peeves.  I'm utterly amazed at how many times I read peoples' ideas for great new collaborative websites that involve things worth money, yet no discussion of how to prevent fraud or limit liability.

Let's say you let people "recommend" or "rate" contractors and the like.  Let's also say the service becomes so popular that contractors start paying attention to how they are rated.  How do you propose preventing one contractor from having friends / family / fake accounts sabotage his competitors' rating?  Who's responsible for ensuring that ratings are objective and meaningful?  How do you propose  handling lawsuits from contractors who claim the service deprives them of business due to fraudulent content?  

Of course, it all sounds a bit paranoid and pessimistic, but these are exactly the sort of things that go on in other "collaborative" online marketplaces today.  AdSense has these problems.  eBay has these problems.  Any site with the critical mass to attract "bad" behavior and make it worth someone's time will have these problems.

Yes, by all means, use the inter-web and it's vast network of tubes to help streamline crappy processes like building permits.  But drop the fuzzy-bunny collaboration.  Not everyone's a saint, and sinners have computers too.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, yeah - if only we&#8217;d all be able to hug each other through the internet and sing kum-bye-yah, etc.  You, sir, have hit one of my pet peeves.  I&#8217;m utterly amazed at how many times I read peoples&#8217; ideas for great new collaborative websites that involve things worth money, yet no discussion of how to prevent fraud or limit liability.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s say you let people &#8220;recommend&#8221; or &#8220;rate&#8221; contractors and the like.  Let&#8217;s also say the service becomes so popular that contractors start paying attention to how they are rated.  How do you propose preventing one contractor from having friends / family / fake accounts sabotage his competitors&#8217; rating?  Who&#8217;s responsible for ensuring that ratings are objective and meaningful?  How do you propose  handling lawsuits from contractors who claim the service deprives them of business due to fraudulent content?  </p>
<p>Of course, it all sounds a bit paranoid and pessimistic, but these are exactly the sort of things that go on in other &#8220;collaborative&#8221; online marketplaces today.  AdSense has these problems.  eBay has these problems.  Any site with the critical mass to attract &#8220;bad&#8221; behavior and make it worth someone&#8217;s time will have these problems.</p>
<p>Yes, by all means, use the inter-web and it&#8217;s vast network of tubes to help streamline crappy processes like building permits.  But drop the fuzzy-bunny collaboration.  Not everyone&#8217;s a saint, and sinners have computers too.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt McAlister &#187; Ikea ruined my floors</title>
		<link>http://www.mattmcalister.com/blog/2007/05/31/178/how-to-fix-building-construction-bureaucracy/#comment-51952</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt McAlister &#187; Ikea ruined my floors</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Sep 2007 16:46:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mattmcalister.com/blog/2007/05/31/178/how-to-fix-building-construction-bureaucracy/#comment-51952</guid>
		<description>[...] The best part of doing your kitchen with Ikea&#8217;s planner, in my mind, is the fact that you can print out the plan and march into the building inspection office to get your plan approved on your own. My wife did just that without having any building experience. She was back home after an hour, permit approved. I really wish we had done that with the overall job, but instead we payed exorbitant fees for professional drawings. I&#8217;ll never make that mistake again. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The best part of doing your kitchen with Ikea&#8217;s planner, in my mind, is the fact that you can print out the plan and march into the building inspection office to get your plan approved on your own. My wife did just that without having any building experience. She was back home after an hour, permit approved. I really wish we had done that with the overall job, but instead we payed exorbitant fees for professional drawings. I&#8217;ll never make that mistake again. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.504 seconds -->
