Why I Don't Like Scoopit Links on Twitter II [Robin Good & Scenttrail Conversaton] | Social Marketing Revolution | Scoop.it

I’m seeing more Scoopit links in my Twitter stream and I’m not crazy about it.  Sure it’s quick and easy to share with Scoopit.  But it not quick and easy to consume. For me it's all about the econ...

Marty Note
If you missed I don't Like Scoop.it Links I, here's a link:

First post prompted a great note from my curator mentor coach Robin Good:

« Marty, I can't agree more. I hate it myself when I see Scoop.it links in my Twitter stream because I know that most of the time it's a lame post with next to no content leading me somewhere else.

I think this is part of the culture of Scoop.it, and the only ones that can change it significantly are those who direct and promote its editorial and marketing policy.

Until you promote a tool like Scoop.it as a tool to save time and produce more content, target it to novice content marketers, and don't moderate actively what you showcase (like Flipboard or Medium do), you can't expect a different kind of outcome. I may be wrong but this is the impression I get. What's your take Marty? »

Yes, but
I agree with Robin much more than I disagree. Points of agreement include:

Agree 80%

* Difficulty of Creating Branded Curators on Scoop.it due to little or no "SHOWCASE".
* Spam control on backs of curators.
* Difficulty of building community on Scoop.it due to the first bullet.

Disagree 20%

* Adding Google authorship signals a desire by Scoop.it to share back value of the commons making Scoop.it UNIQUE in social nets / tools.
* No commons is constructed as much as guided, influenced and moved like weather or a wave at a football game.

The disagreement 20% speaks to the highly distributed nature of any commons. When content is coming in from pirates and the navy then content cherished, featured and held up as examples creates powerful social signals.

This very TINY balancing beam is where cutators and editors of any commons must excel. Too heavy a hand and free discourse is squashed. Too light a hand and the commons (substitute community if it makes it easier to understand lol) can't find or share its spirit.

Robin is successful because he is creative, intelligent and generous. Robin's skills mean he can be successful anywhere, so finding ways to partner with Robin, giving Robin (and Michele, Jan, Karen and Brian) "jobs" or defined roles would help shore up the GOOD and so decrease chances for the BAD to run amok.

This "Showcasing" is a fine art since it too walks a fine and tiny beam between elitist and populist. When Robin hit 1M views on Scoop.it I would have been tempted to have a much bigger party (lol). The key push and pull between curators and any commons is how much value will be shared with the sharecropping contributors.

When Robin and then Ana-Christina right behind him passed a million views I would have stopped time a little to interview them, qualify their tactics and strategies and in so doing call attention to a tool capable of helping a sharecropper reach a lot of people.

For me, the third act of any commons is always "Review the Reviewer" or Brand the Curator (in Scoop.it's case). Who gets that? Red Bull gets it. I think FlipBoard does too though Robin has more experience there than me (recent innovations make me want to go back and check it out).

Tools, like life itself, aren't permanent fixtures. As Scoop.it crosses this next chasm it walks a tight rope across the Grand Canyon and competitors such as FlipBoard are generating lots of wind. The Scoopit team is smart and they must sense a pivot is upon them. Personally I want to help. In for a penny...:). Marty