All social input strategies rely on the good-graces of well-intentioned users habituated to provide input over time to succeed… Social strategies will self-correct for this problem over time under the presumption that more users than not will provide “good” information.
A few weeks ago, I had the pleasure of giving a presentation on taxonomy vs. folksonomy in the enterprise to the Deloitte Social Tagging &Taxonomy Community of Practice, thanks to an invitation by fellow taxonomy enthusiasts Annie Wang and Lee Romero.
It was a fun presentation (avariation on this talk) and the audience asked some great questions afterwards. I was only able to answer a couple of questions before time ran out, so Ioffered to answer the rest on my blog. Here are the additional questions &answers:
1. Are there tools for auto-correcting social tags?
I had mentioned the idea that folksonomies are considered to be “self-correcting” or self-tuning – through volume of tags and users, anomalies (like single-use tags, misspellings, etc.)tend to be pushed to the side and the majority will trend towards correct/useful tags.This is an idea that I picked up from awhitepaper on social tagging by Oracle:
Continues @ http://sethearley.wordpress.com
Related articles by Zemanta
- It’s not easy staying on the edge of chaos (digitalassetmanagement.org.uk)
- Metadata as source of digital anthropology (digitalassetmanagement.org.uk)
- Folksonomies: Business Use (digitalassetmanagement.org.uk)
- When Social Software Vendors Start Talking about Architecture, Something Is Changing (digitalassetmanagement.org.uk)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_c.png?x-id=54fe4be5-621b-4b17-80bf-4f70e8fc002d "Social Tagging - Questions Answered on Correction Tools and Vendors 2")