Reason:
The author guesses, that the Web is increasingly populated by information processing entities and that in all definitions of new Web community concepts, this should be taken into account. (TheSingularityIsNear).
Discussion: Therefore each WebAgent should at least have an operational GoalStatement against which their actions can be measured and taken into account -- FridemarPache
According to this definition each human web user is also a WebAgent. On the other hand a personal GoalStatement a pretty high-level requirement, that we like to see with CommunityMember's because it makes them more accountable and the collaboration easier. But as a general requirement it seem unrealistic, even impossible. All interactions would have to be conscious and goal-related, either context-related (knowing the context) or context-free (having universal goals). A very idealistic requirement that probably would just result in pro-forma GoalStatement's. -- HelmutLeitner
From an abstract philosophical view, a human can be seen as a Subject (i.e. a selfreflecting Object of high complexity). In the same sense as a GoalStatement (a rudimentary set of disclosed ethical rules, compatible with the ethics of its human environment) works for humans, each non-human agent should have disclosed his rule set for public inspection and testing. The author is aware of the complex consequences. When 'AI surpasses human intelligence', each AI is responsible to prove their local rule-set as compatible with the global-ethics of the Wiki:GlobalBrain. -- FridemarPache