“As users engage in low threshold participation (read, favorite, tag and link) we gain a form of collective intelligence. But it is important to distinguish the value of collective intelligence and collaborative intelligence, as first pointed out by Mitch Kapor:
…Tons of interesting types of collaborative filtering, like Digg, is TiVo like, indicating individual preferences, with some algorythm logic. Valid and interesting, but people are not connecting. Different from a bunch of people focusing on creating something. That is higher value than collaborative filtering, my thesis, if you can get people to work together. Look at health information, broadly speaking, why are doctors not collaborating to build such a resource — the lack of information, locked up in a database that Harvard publishes, kills people. I can feel the opportunity…
When users participate in high enagement activities, connecting with one another, a different kind of value is being created. But my core point isn’t just the difference between these forms of group intelligence — but actually how they co-exist in the best communities.”
“Part of what makes Flickr work isn’t just excellence at low threshold engagement, but the ability to form groups. Participation in communities plots along a power law with a solid core/periphery model — provided social software supports both low threshold participation and high engagement. “
From Ross Mayfield’s blog
Marikaya 