Why I was wrong about Quora as a blogging service

scobleizer.com

18 points·moses1400··7 comments

I think this is pretty much expected from Scoble after he was shunned on Quora by bunch of users who didn't like his constant name dropping and pictures in his answers. To be honest I also found his answers quite lacking.

He was miffed by the following answer being killed: http://www.quora.com/World-Economic-Forum/Is-Davos-nothing-b... (quite amusing, but perhaps not as intended)

It seems like Quora's business plan was (1) get lots of users and then (2) think of some way to preserve quality. I hope they can flesh out the second part before everyone leaves again.

Given that Quora's content is collaboratively organized and in some cases edited, it seems obvious that Quora is not a service for content where the author wants his or her individual voice to be heard.

Answers are NOT collaboratively edited. It's a hybrid approach - Questions are communal; Answers are personal but voted and commented; Answer Wikis (infrequently used) are communal.

Also, Quora provides "Posts", which are not associated with Questions. They are much-more blog-like (and the main criticism of Scoble's answer was that it should have been a a post).

So he's mad he can't be The Star?

He's mad because his comment was hidden through the collaborative organization process.

Quora's team is either disingenuous or lost themselves. Many of their own people are using Quora as a Twitter - sharing thoughts, chit chats, in a form of questions. How viable is that to sustain a service? If they wanted to create a social-networking site to begin with, than why bother with the QA format?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com