Fred‘s got some great points about delicious’ overinvestment in crowdsourcing. [thanks to headshift for the link]
the fact that del.icio.us overlooks the value of the individual is a key structural hole in the service. Del.icio.us is populated by many brilliant minds, but they are simply too hard to find! Its almost as if everyone on del.icio.us is blogging anonymously. It might have made sense a few years ago, but it doesn’t anymore. Del.icio.us can improve the social aspects of the service without becoming another social network; the idea that adding social to del.icio.us is somehow a negative is completely bunk. Social can be added well, and it will make del.icio.us even more popular. It’s time for del.icio.us to realize the value of editorship.
I think that’s right.
Fred also talks about making finding people easier. I personally have two types of feed I follow in delicious. Luminaries – as Fred calls them – or people I feel I ought to be following are the first. This group are generally visible enough in other channels (blogs etc) for me to find them on delicious – though it still takes a bit of work). In many ways, though these are the safe bets.
The second group are less visible, but effectively provide me with a tailored, edited and interesting reading list. They’re close to hitting the “optimal unfamiliarity” sweetspot Ton has spoken about. Sadly, it takes me a fair amount of effort to find these feeds. Focusing on the editorial social aspects may well mitigate that.