I have been pondering possible improvements to the format of Facebook that would have universal appeal among users. Please do look at my suggestions and let me know what you think.
Thanks,
Emanuel
Headings for the Facebook options:
FACEBOOK
Vote on new Facebook CEO
Vote on pending Facebook policy
Propose legislation for Facebook privacy
Suggestions for Facebook functions and policy (pending votes by Facebook citizens on policy)
Election of Facebook congress to represent your interest groups
Full disclosure of all Facebook financial transactions
Your Facebook stock value (amount acquired in return for the content you produced)
Your royalties today for the content you have produced for Facebook
Actions
Archive of Facebook postings
Year/Month/Day/hour
Post news
Review and correct news posted on major media
Find people with similar concerns globally
Organize a political party
Launch a class action lawsuit against a multinational corporation
Business
Design your own emoticon
Write your literary work
Sell your design or work
Buy designs and texts
Develop business relations with other small businesses around the world
Health:
Find out rates for cancer and other diseases in your region
Update on air and water pollution in your region
Compare malpractice cases for doctors in your region
Where produce sold in local stores is produced and amounts of contaminant found
YOUR POST:
Post to Media:
Personal Post (privacy setting):
Entertainment Post
Your art:
Whistleblowing (corporate or government):
Facebook Search (select browser or create browser with your community):
Like this:
Like Loading...
Related
Circles and Squares 
– ideas/units of thought as an own item-category
– citations as an own item-category
– easily creating / seeing relations between ideas and citations (such as contradictions, opposing view, mutually supportive, lack of clarity or evidence, most influential etc.)
– search for people and study-groups by major influential books / citations / ideas to their mindset
– a section which is all about admitting doubts, certain wrongdoings and pondering the limits of one’s own point-of-view
Thank you so much. And please more.
addition to “Write your literary work”:
1. publish your papers with full support for a markup language (e.g. latex) defining styles and content. thus the paper could be exported to other formats (pdf) and embedded while retaining a professional look (citation, pagination…). the social software itself could be used to professionally publish a paper without any drawbacks.
2. as on e.g. medium.com, the readers furthermore should be able to highlight sentences and – going beyond the functionality on medium.com – express “agreement”, “disagreement”, highlight something as “major thesis” (independently of whether they agree with it), to have “flawed logic” or be “incomprehensible”. the software could then use filters to visually show which passages in the text itself where most influential – and in what way – to the readers.
3. furthermore the readers should be able to easily create links to other statements in other papers and defining the relations between them (mutual support or counter-thesis/evidence asf.).
4. ideally classical texts which are not under copyright anymore could be manually added to a global papers-library and markup language added to them as well as relations to other statements in other papers.
none of this is new, all of this we have been doing all along anyway, basic rules of hermeneutics gone digital…
– a peer-pressure-tool. you set a goal publicly and together with other peers watch over each other completing the self-chosen-task (there are many ways of implementing this, some attempts are already on the web, but in any case it should be a basic function of a social network since peer-pressure is a basic function of sociality itself, whether we want it or not).
peer pressure is used pretty much everywhere in traditional institutions and it indeed makes people “productive” and useful “tools”, but mostly with devastating effects since you usually neither control the object of commitment nor are you made aware of the pitfalls of peer pressure itself (competitive mind, pretending & deceit, unhealthy self-images…) and made a mere object of interests of others.
consciously chosen peer pressure (you chose the goal, level of commitment, significant others and practices you trust) on the other hand can be a very useful tool to get people grow beyond themselves, which is always in a way painful and something we will want to avoid – but shouldn’t.
I think a moderation/meta-moderation system such as has existed on Slashdot for many years would be useful for users wanting to skip over irrational or spammy content, while at the same time being able to see it if they so choose. It’s the only automated solution to comment moderation I’ve ever seen work, and it cuts down reading time tremendously, leaving time to do work in the world. By contrast, the Facebook system of viewing content is devised solely for its profit, not for users and their own goals,
In order to achieve a Facebook redesign of the kind you propose, you would have to expropriate Facebook, its infrastructure, and its personnel; that would seem to require that you be a nation-state. It is true that people are dying for a Facebook alternative, When Diaspora was announced, money and good will flooded in, only for everyone to find that the proponents were actually quite poor programmers and had no way of achieving their lofty goals.
I treat the topic in greater detail in
“Facebook and the Future of Global Governance”
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/22838-facebook-and-the-future-of-global-governance