W5. Reading Assignment - Young ryun,Chun

* Summary

 Wikipedia is an example of how community decisions are made in a new context. Its openness, diversity of subject and scope, membership turnover and anonymity play an important role in practicing consensus.

 Wikipedia is made up of community cooperation, but there is also authoritative leadership. Wikipedia cannot be specifically classified, but there is this unofficial dictator. They resolve and defend conflicts through positions gained by interest within and outside the community. In other words, such authority and ongoing discussions should be balanced.

 Wales says a dictator is unnecessary, but people value Wales' leadership highly on Wikipedia's development. This is because the leader's interest affects the community culture.

 There is no official leader of a Wikipedia. since co-founder Sanger. As such, Wikipedia claims equal status, but leaders exist. This is because administrators can quickly intervene and prevent inappropriate information.

 Thus, such a dictator is needed from the difficulties inherent in decision-making in a vast, spontaneous and consensus-oriented community.


*What interesting


I knew there was a manager in Wikipedia, but I learned that the role of these managers and dictators was important. This is because it keeps people's right discussions going on in a voluntary and consensus-oriented community. I wonder what kind of cases there are in projects other than Wikipedia.



*Discussion


Then, can you tell the difference between a benevolent dictator and a dictator who wields power as he wants? It's unlikely to be easy to be a merciful dictator not only in Wikipedia but also in other open projects. How can we do the right leadership?

Comments

  1. JaeSeong LeeApril 19, 2020 at 7:37 AM

    Dictatorship and leadership seem to be slightly different. In the case of dictatorship, I think I'm talking about a leader who completely ignores the opinions of others and moves on his own. On the contrary, I think leadership is the quality of a leader who accepts others' opinions and can choose the best doctor among them. In a way, they are similar but slightly different. Broadly speaking, it could be seen as leadership by dictatorship.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Woojin JeongApril 19, 2020 at 8:42 AM

    Hi Youngryun. I've always liked your article! I also wondered that how can tell between good dictators(?) and bad dictators! I think person who controls others without taking his own advantage is a good dictator(?).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

WK 5.2 The Benevolent Dictator - Hanane Ben Abdeslam

In the reading it starts with the example of a “Neo-Nazi” dictator, it didn’t say when it exactly happened but I think it was during World War I and II. This dictator just did what he wanted to do, locking articles down, ban people, and protecting their own reputation and integrity. Actually, for someone to have that much power by a community founder is not unique to Wikipedia. Such leaders are often found in a project around, which a community develops, or otherwise emerge from a leaderless context by way of merit. However, Wikipedia is not an anarchy, democracy, nor a monarchy. Because of the voluntary and meritocratic character of open content communities it is not surprising that leaders are expected to lead by example as their very leadership is founded upon exemplary behavior. This means that leadership emerges through action rather than appointment. The prominent leader of an open content community is sometimes characterizing as a benevolent dictator. This is a variation on a t...
Read more

W2. What is Wikipedia - Seungju Lee

Summary Wikipedia is a multilingual online encyclopedia as an collaboration project. It isn't made by one people. Anyone can write and share information. It is maintained by non profit organizations. It is the largest and most popular  general reference work on the World Wide Web, and is one of the 20 most popular websites. Diverse information can be found in encyclopedia. Interesting point Wikipedia is made by group. All people in group can share their own information. Not only expert, but also anyone who have interest in topic, they can participate in make dictionary. I had a negative opinion about this in past, because this can affect on accuracy of information. But, after I realized that  this is "collaboration" project, many people can give a feedback to writers who post wrong information. So I could change my mind that that kind of feedback make good circulation on advance of wikipedia. And also it is collaboration project,  so I think variety of informat...
Read more

W2. What is Wikipedia? / Juhee Cha

After reading http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/foreward.html http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/preface-web.html http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/preface.html *Summary Wikipedia is a collaborative community that can freely and voluntarily make changes to the world. empower people to a wide The people who share knowledge here are not for the sake of money but for the people who love knowledge sharing itself. The data that you normally seek for knowledge is limited. These materials are difficult to produce and logically technical. But Wikipedia makes those processes simple. Wikipedia goes through the process of discussing drafts, sending comments, pointing out what is missing, and presenting ideas. *Interesting Point There was also definitely a negative perception of the Internet dictionary before taking the class. The biggest reason for this was that the public, not the 'experts', could modify it. But rather, after learning about Wikipedia's principles, I changed m...
Read more