MULTI-PLATFORM SOCIAL MEDIA NETWORK

Abstract

A multi-platform social media platform, which includes an adaptive system for ranking user credibility based on feedback from other users. A user ranking corresponds to a user's initial ranking and the feedback that is provided by other users over time. The user's initial ranking is assigned by the social media platform based on the user's professional qualifications and education. The feedback provided from other users changes the user's ranking, based on whether the feedback is positive or negative. The user's rank is used as an analog for the user's credibility and the trustworthiness of content created by the user. Users of the social media platform may use a user's rank to determine whether the user is a credible source of information.

Claims

1. A method of peer rating users on a social media network, the method implemented by a processor of a computing system, comprising: assigning, in real time by the processor, a user's rank based on the user's background; and adjusting, in real time by the processor, the user's rank based on a feedback from another user.

2. The method as recited in claim 1 wherein the user is assigned a class, in real time by the processor.

3. The method as recited in claim 1 wherein the user's rank is increased, in real time by the processor, as a result of receiving a positive feedback from another user.

4. The method as recited in claim 1 wherein the user's rank is decreased in real time by the processor, as a result of receiving a negative feedback from another user.

5. The method as recited in claim 1 wherein the user's rank is initially assigned based on the user's education.

6. The method as recited in claim 1 wherein the user's rank is initially assigned based on the user's career training.

7. The method as recited in claim 1 wherein the user's rank is initially assigned based on the user having a state or federal license.

8. The method as recited in claim 2 wherein the user's class is initially assigned based on the user's career training.

9. The method as recited in claim 2 wherein the user's class is initially assigned based on the user having a state or federal license.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0011] FIG. 1 is a flow-chart that illustrates the sequence of events taking place in the method of the invention for the communication between users with common interests.

[0012] FIG. 2 is a flow-chart that illustrates the sequence of events taking place in the method of the invention for the Professional Users receiving positive and negative feedback.

[0013] FIG. 3 is a flow-chart that illustrates the sequence of events taking place in the method of the invention for the General Users receiving positive and negative feedback.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0014] It is an object of the present invention to create a multi-user, multi-platform, social network and mobile application which connects users with similar interests across multiple platforms. Another object of the present invention is to provide a system and method for peer rating, vetting, validating, review, and credentialing of users and user content.

[0015] It is an object of the present invention to create a multi-user, multi-platform, social networking and mobile application which connects users with shared interests, and interest groups. The present invention can connect various users to other users with similar interests and facilitate communication between two or more separate users via various methods of real time and non-real time communication systems, and an application environment encouraging the social connectivity and communication between two or more separate users with similar interests.

[0016] It is an object of the present invention to create a system and method of peer rating, vetting, validating, reviewing and credentialing users and user content on a multi-user, multi-platform, social network and mobile application (collectively the “Site”). The present invention allows users to review and rate other users, and their content. The present invention includes a system consisting of multiple classes of users including without limitation, “General Users” and “Professional Users.” General Users are defined as an average person who joins the Site. “Professional Users” are defined as users that join the Site, who are professionals or seen as highly knowledgeable or experienced in a particular field. For example, in the healthcare field, Professional Users would include medical doctors, medical researchers, scientists and nurses. General Users (“GU” or “GUs” for the plural of GU) and Professional Users (“PU” or “PUs” for the plural of PU) (each a “User”) are different User classes or classifications. When a User signs up to the site that User is given an initial Peer Rank number based on that User's class or classification (“Class”). For example, a GU might receive a Peer Rank of “100” while a PU would initially receive a PU of “1000.” A “Peer Rank” (“PR” or “PRs” for the plural of PR) is defined as a number assigned to a User when they join the Site, which is designed to reflect the User's background knowledge, credentials and qualifications in a field. Over time a PR will increase or decrease based on feedback, of User created content, given by other Users. If a User receives positive feedback, from another User, then their PR will increase. If a User receives negative feedback, from another User, then a User's PR will decrease. Initially, PUs are assigned higher PRs than GUs, to reflect their increased knowledge, education and experience in an applicable field. As GU's and PU's create and post content or messages on the Site the GU and PU may receive positive or negative feedback from either GUs or PUs, this feedback is defined as “Peer Feedback,” which may be either positive or negative responses to content or messages posted by a User. Peer Feedback is provided to Users through a feedback mechanism on the Site, which allows a user to provide Peer Feedback. Whenever any content or messages are posted through the Site by a User, such content or messages will include a mechanism, for example a clickable button, that allows Users to provide Peer Feedback. The Weight given to Peer Feedback by one User classification may not be equal to the Weight given to Peer Feedback by a different User classification or by a different User. “Weight” is defined as the amount that Peer Feedback changes a User's PR in either a positive or negative direction. The Weight given to Peer Feedback is determined by the PR and classification of the User providing the Peer Feedback. The greater a User's PR the greater the Weight of that User's Peer Feedback will be on the recipient User of Peer Feedback. For example, a User that has a PR of “5000” will be able to affect another User's PR with a single Peer Feedback response in a greater manner than a Peer Feedback from a User having a PR of “100.” The Peer Feedback system is structured so that it gives Users, which have the greatest experience, education, training and credibility, more influence in determining which other Users are creating, or posting, credible content by making Peer Feedback, which is created by User's with high PR, more Weight in adjusting the PR of other users. PUs, or highly ranked GUs, are given more authority, within the Peer Feedback system, to determine whether User created or posted content is legitimate, trustworthy and credible. The Peer Feedback system and method acts as mechanism to allow Site Users to internally peer review and establishing the credibility of User created Site content and of Users. The Peer Feedback system assists all Users in understanding which Users are trustworthy and credible content creators, or respected by other Users. The Peer Feedback system also includes a method for Site administration oversight of PRs. The Site administration shall have the authority to change any Users PR at any time. This oversight is an invaluable part of the Peer Feedback system, in that it allows the Site administration to correct any erroneous, manipulated or arbitrary PRs.

[0017] FIG. 1. is a flow chart 100 illustrating a process of connecting users of the multi-platform social media network, who are interested in the same topics. Flow Chart 100 illustrates how that GU#1 is interested in topic X 101, GU#2 is also interested in topic X 102, and PU#1 is interested in topic X 103. GU#1 and GU#2 form or connect to a group of people interested in topic X 104. Additionally, GU#2 may connect with PU#1 directly to communicate regarding their interest in topic X 105. Flow chart 100, further illustrates that GU#3 is interested in topic Y 106, PU#2 is interested in topic Y 107, and PU#3 is interested in topic Y 108. GU#3 and PU#2 may form or connect to a group to communicate regarding their interest in topic Y 109. Additionally, PU#2 and PU#3 may connect directly to communicate regarding their interest in topic Y 110.

[0018] FIG. 2. is a flow chart 200 illustrating a process of the Peer Feedback system working to alter the PR of PU#1. PU#1 joins the Site and is given an initial PR of 1000 201. PU#1 then creates and posts content to the Site about a topic 202. PU#1 then receives positive Peer Feedback from PU#2 203. PU#1's PR increases as a result of PU#2's positive Peer Feedback 204. Alternatively, after PU#1 creates and posts content to the Site about a topic 202, PU#1 may receive negative Peer Feedback from PU#2 205. As a result of the negative Peer Feedback from PU#2, PU#1's PR decreases.

[0019] FIG. 3. is a flow chart 300 illustrating a process of the Peer Feedback system working to alter the PR of GU#1. GU#1 joins the Site and is given an initial PR of 100 301. GU#1 then creates and posts content to the Site 302. GU#2 then gives GU#1 positive Peer Feedback 303. GU#1's PR increases as a result of the positive Peer Feedback from GU#2. Alternatively, if GU#2 gives GU#1 negative Peer Feedback 305, then GU#1's PR will decrease 306.

[0020] The present invention can be applied across a wide variety of social networks and is not limited mobile applications for healthcare topics.

[0021] What sets this application apart from other social network sites is the use of curated and non-curated information through a peer feedback and peer rank system and method, as well as, the manner in which users search for other users based on their aligned interests. PRs are dynamic and change over time based on peer feedback from other users.

[0022] The present invention's mobile application features a method and system for rating users to establish the average trustworthiness of a user and a user's content in the social network. Mobile users are provided with a feature that allows them to rate a user's private messages as well as content posted by users, including without limitation, image posts, video posts, and written posts.

[0023] Thus, according to one aspect, the method of the invention for rating the trustworthiness of social media network users can be summarized as follows: (a) assigning different classes of users with initial ranks; (b) increasing, or decreasing, a user's rank based on positive, or negative, feedback from another users (the “Feedback User”), the size of the increase, or decrease, in rank is based on the class and rank of the Feedback User at the time when feedback is given; (c) feedback is given by a Feedback User if the Feedback User likes or dislikes a post, message or content posted by a user, or because the Feedback User finds a post, message or content to be trustworthy or untrustworthy. A user's rank provides other users with guidance regarding that user's trustworthiness and whether Feedback Users liked or disliked that user's messages, content and posts.