W9. Discuss Reagle's Chapters 3-4

1. Summary

 Chapter 3 explains the 'collaborative culture'. Because many people participate in editing in Wikipedia, many different viewpoints are involved in editing, and this is often a war rather than a good debate. Therefore, the authors say that the culture of collaboration is a very important factor in looking at the future of society, not just Wikipedia. The term "collaborative culture" refers to a set of assumptions, values, meanings, and actions that work within a community. To collaborate, it is important to maintain a neutral position, and in addition to listening to others' opinions, patience is necessary. In addition, this article says that politeness and humor are necessary.

Chapter 4 explains the culture of openness. The author defines five characteristics of Wikipedia as open community. Open content, Transparency, Integrity, Nondiscrimination, Noninterference. However, the unconditional emphasis of these five features necessarily leads to other problems. Therefore, there is a need for systems that can handle these problems.

2. Interesting Point

 Chapter 3 gives interesting sentence. Wikipedia is not a member of the Wikipedia article, but it does not describe the debate. "A more recent version of the page suggests that" - but do not assert the opinions themselves. I am very interested about the "ASSERT facts". In general, we know that the word 'inform' is more appropriate than 'assert' to explain ‘Fact’. But Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, so the facts can change at any time as time goes by. Therefore, the present fact may not be in the future. In this respect, I think the expression 'assert' facts is very appropriate.

 The most interesting thing in Chapter 4 is the five characteristics of the open community, but what I have chosen is "Trolls are driving force of Wikipedia. The worst trolls often spur the best editors in creating a brilliant article with watertight references where the trollish escapades would only have a brief stub. - Bachmann's Law". When team members kill the boss together in the game, there is a clear difference between team members. There is a so-called troll. However, despite these trolls, the best way to win a game is to have the best person pay for another Troll. I was interesting that this principle works in Wikipedia too.

3. Discussion Point

 I have a question that I would like to discuss in relation to the four interesting points of Interesting Point. Trolls, of course, act as a driving force for better editors to edit harder. However, as a result, trollers may no longer be able to leave the Wikipedia by seeing their edits change. If so, will not there be only some talented editors in Wikipedia? Once again, the game that does not have these trolls becomes a so-called "stagnant water (There is no further inflow of new users.)". It will rot without any further influx. The most powerful example is that Korean Wikipedia has reached 320,000 articles by July 2015, starting with its first article in 2002, but has not reached 330,000 by 2018. I think this danger exists. What about other people's thoughts?