Edward Nudelman published this great article after interviewing Tom Gerace, Gather's CEO.
But the comments ended up talking more about how to rate Gather articles.
Your rating presumably changes two things:
(1) How many gather points the author gets from the article
(2) How visible the article is on the site
So there's a high temptation for people who disagree with a political viewpoint to rate it low. Not only does it hurt the finances of their loyal opposition, but it makes it less likely that people who cruise through the highest rated articles will see an opinion the rater dislikes.
I started on Gather/beta on the first of December. At first, I published only political articles. I was quickly able to achieve a place in the top 25 most-read authors.
Then, to experiment, I spent a week publishing recipes and poetry. *BINGO* I ended up in the highest rated authors.
It is possible to attempt both. I'm currently 28th most read and 35th highest rated -- something of a balance.
But unless Gather finds a way to rate the raters (i.e. some people's votes are weighted higher than others, something like moderator authority in SlashDot's system) we will tend to have people rating articles by how much they agree with the author.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 1
If a way to stop voters from voting down political articles simply because they disagree could be agreed on, the integrity of the entire site would benefit.
Other sites I have visited or used that let the nuking/burying of articles go unadressed always end up in a heap on the virtual floor.