Originally Posted by
intuition
In my mind, if the summary of this thread states "opt-out is just a nice to have", it suggests nsx read this thread very selectively.
His words were:
"The next two functions are a trade-off between value and implementation cost, and I don't yet have any information on the latter. So these will take time to research:"
"Nice to have" was my own unsolicited opinion of the feature.
If opt-out is left out, I guess members who doesn't want to be voted upon can resort to self-censoring by refraining from posting helpful things.
Yes, taking one's marbles and going home is always an option.
This is in fact what has happened on some social media sites, where users have learned the hard way that they have very little control over how posted material is used.
I'm fairly sure
the T&C here gives IB more latitude about how to use whatever you post here than most things posted to major social media sites (especially in light of the Facebook-FTC settlement.) If nothing else, the grant of license here is specifically listed as "irrevokable" whereas
Facebook and Google's social features (although not some other parts of Google's services) explicitly give you the right to delete your content and end their license to reuse it.
The possibility of a more general opt-out, and to whatever extent IB is willing to allow it, is worth looking into. I really don't see how the addition of a "like" feature in any way changes the basic nature of it, nor how it makes it somehow more likely that IB will reuse posted content with or without attribution.
(I have no idea if IB is sophisticated enough to data-mine "likes" but even if they do, it's hard to see the impact of that on the person receiving the "likes" -- the value of a "like" in data mining or advertising is almost entirely based on the person doing the "liking" and not the underlying content.)