# Discuss Reagle's Chapter 5

# Discuss Reagle's Chapter 5

I think consensus is a basic prerequisite for Wikipedia, an open community. For agreement, a variety of devices are in place at Wikipedia, including discussions, co-editing, deleting and adding.
Reading the article, the question of "agreements realize democracy, but are they always the right way?" In the past tribal life, there was a dictator by force. Democracy was realized as society began to flow through the dictator's words and problems began to emerge. With the advent of democracy, individuals began to express opinions about social problems and phenomena, and individual opinions were respected and the concept of voting or majority consent began to emerge. Among them, many conditions must be involved to achieve the concept of consensus.I looked at the concepts related to the agreement in the article and saw the following questions and answers in the conclusion section. "How many Wikipedians do it take to change a light bulb?" In view of this, the agreement seemed inefficient. Does it make sense to need 69 people for a single light bulb? I think the reason why I felt this way was because the questions were extreme. However, in this context, I think the concept of agreement should be well thought out.

Discussion:
I said that consensus is good, but it is also inefficient. Nevertheless, why does society still seek more consensus?

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