[12] Discuss Reagle's chapter 6

<Discuss Reagle's chapter 6> 

  Read chapter 6. At chapter 5, there was a slight hint of the 'benevolent dictator'. But it was hard to understand about it. But now, yes I can understand about it. It is all about the concept of leadership and the adapt to English Wikipedia. 
  As we all know, Wikipedia is an open, civil, deliberative community-not easily shown to us. Matching all the sources to one community-a perfect community- is very difficult. And it is the same at Wikipedia too. For the base, Wikipedia supports the openness to everyone and the even power to everyone. But it could cause several problems, and it naturally leads to a perform of a leader. And in Wikipedia, We can call it a 'benevolent dictator'. They try to take a balance through various people in Wikipedia, and make the queries right. Some could think then is this a perfect democracy? But there is a need for a leader in Wikipedia. Wales and Sanger discuss about the concept of leadership well with their own stories and researches. 
  Wikipedia has it's own utopia-for making the 100% openness, democracy, civil, deliberateness and so on-, but it's a community based by people and where people exists, it's just hard to make a 100% perfect social group. We can say that Wikipedia chose the most efficient way for a community, 'Democratic Republican'. 

[discussion] What if Wikipedia supported communism? What would happen?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Discuss Reagle’s chapters 3-4

Discuss Reagle’s chapters 3-4 I read the Reagle's chapters 3-4. I find two opinion. One thing is how to collaborate people on Wikipedia. Other is how to make open community on Wikipedia. How to collaborate people on Wikipedia. In the case of the English Wikipedia, there is a collaborative culture that asks its participants to assume two postures: a stance of neutral point of view on matters of knowledge, and a stance of good faith toward one’s fellow contributors. I think that people know the mood that must keep the rule on Wikipedia. If Wikipedia's mood is light, people write the light writing. Other is how to make open community on Wikipedia. I remember the discussion that Why the Women is smaller that the men on Wikipedia. I've heard from others the reason that women don't use it much because the community isn't friendly to women. I think that we try to create Wikipedia to use all the people no matter that the sex. I think it's a process ...
Read more

Discuss Reagle's Chapter3-4

In  the Reagle  Chapter 3-4, the troll and the ignore rules were impressive.  Troll is the one who destroys teamwork and leads the team to ruin.  Trolls, which are negative characters, help develop Wikipedia. Wikipedia finds the wrong information generated by the troll. And the information is modified by others. In that process, it results in more information production. There is an outlaw, similar to a troll. The lawless ignores all regulations, including copyright and reference. Like Trolls, they help develop Wikipedia. They are free to edit because they are out of regulation. The free edited content is modified by others, including attaching references and deleting content that is caught in copyright issues. Wikipedia develops as it takes care of these types of people.
Read more

Discuss Reagle’s chapter 5

Discuss Reagle’s chapter 5 It is hard to understand this chapter. When I used the Wikipedia, I thought I don't need to group communication. Because the communication space is hidden, so I don't find it. I'm hard to find the communication space on Wikipedia. I think that the Wikipedia communication is not good at working in Korea. There are not many advisers on Korea Wikipedia. The Wiktionary definitions for consensus speak of “general agreement,” “without active opposition to the proposed course of action. I found it important for members to reach an agreement on Wikipedia. It's not an easy task, but I think it can produce a good results. So I think that's why Wikipedia exists. It can appear in a chat window, and go and talk to the other person's chat room. Perhaps it ends up as a personal versus personal matter, but I think that's also an agreement. If conversation does not take place, I don't think an agreement is reached either. Wiki...
Read more