Shared publicly  - 
Identity and Reputation Circle

We know Klout has some suckiness, so what should it be doing differently?  My vision is below. I call it the Dashboard of Me.

I had a great discsuion with +James Barraford +Randy Resnick +Gregory Esau +Jeffrey Raskin +Ellen Molenaar and more about a week and a half ago:

While there is a lot ot complain about, I think the opportunities for understanding and quantizing digital reputation are enormous. Here is where I beleive that +Klout, or someone like them, needs to go:

I think the real value of Klout is an an API, as a layer that will be used to filter the firehoses of data that Social and the Internet of Things will bring us.

The layer and those scores have to be much more granular and topic-based, so the +K system has to evolve quickly -- it cannot stay a crowdsourced game but rather must be generated based on document and transaction analysis (what I refer to as contributiveness).

I also see an opportunity to merge in skill tagging and certification (for job hunting) and even transaction experience (like eBay ratings), such that people that look at me via such an API can instantly evaluate proxies for reputation, influence, interest and skill.  Think of it as a 'dashboard of me'.

The world is changing fast. To own or broker such data is to be in a very key position.

I would have to think more about how to get Klout from here to there. Part of the issue of course is that there are are no existing consumers of such an API, though that should evolve fast.

What do you think?

image from
Jeff Jockisch's profile photoEllen Molenaar's profile photoWolfgang Hilpert's profile photoDamilola Oni's profile photo
+Jeff Jockisch Could it be topic specific scores? Someone that only really cares about entertainment gets a score based on that. Someone that's looking to land a job within the IT field can get a score based on that area only.This means people can feel okay about covering various areas with the knowledge they won't be penalized. Also make it so the scores are easily understood by all participating.
I have been advocating for a topic-based system of rating, as i believe it would improve the quality of sharing. I also agree with +James Barraford that having eclectic knowledge and covering a wide range of topics should be rewarded and not penalized.
+Jeff Jockisch Google's existing authority ranking score is based on a nuanced evaluation of depth (i.e. specialization) and breadth (i.e. reach). What you suggest would crowdsource and social media source verification and reputation in equal measure. The question here is how would you stop it from being gamed? eBay scores are tied to monetary transactions and cannot be gamed, though in the early days of eBay there were online classes on "how to get 1000+ score on eBay fast". 
Klout has more than just "some suckiness" it is the definition of suckiness in the dictionary
Hey +Ronnie Bincer thanks for the question.

At the moment my concept doesn't rely on an API at all. 

Now, down the road once the database is seeded with all of the "right" people, then I may want to add an algo via an API of sorts.

Thanks again for the question and thinking of me Ronnie.
+David Amerland  I think we are actually on the same page. I don't want to "crowdsource and social media source verification and reputation in equal measure."

Crowdsourcing can be valuable additional info, but document and network analysis comes first.

Am I misunderstanding you?
I agree +James Barraford  and +Damilola Oni.  Must be topic and/or named entity-based.  Ultimately you might be able to roll-up all of the factors in a Dashboard of Me to give an overall score with some validity, but the individual data points are what we need.
What I think....I get the impression that you only listen to the ones in your comfort zone, the analytic ones. +Jeff Jockisch  Klout still is a machine. Your suggestions makes it even more manipulative and feed only the competitive alpha dog, and those are not the decisive people you want in your team. Data roaming on what I write, no.. certainly not. Heck, how about privacy. I suggest that companies have a good HRM consultant with a really good sensor for whom to employ. That's what I think. ;-)
Add a comment...