W9 blog topic: discuss Reagle’s chapter 3 and 4 - Hyerim Won

1. Summary
The openness of Wikipedia makes it easy for anyone to access information. In the motto "Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit," we can find claims about the openness of Wikipedia. But often it is improperly interpreted as being done without any norm or order. In other words, it may be difficult to balance freedom of expression, people's safety, and other concerns of the project itself, as well as the associated value of transparency, integrity, and differentiation. This article expains the features of Wikipedia's "openness" by asking the reverse questions.

2. Interesting point
After reading this article, I thought about freedom of expression. Wikipedia is a FOSS(Free and Open Source Software)that all people voluntarily participate and share. Furthermore, they use 'discussion' to share their knowledge and discuss freely. But, "Do you believe that it is true that you believe you know? Is the way of expression free? Is the shared information really profitable? " The question came up. But this article said Wikipedia is free and open, but it limits both liberty and openness that hinder the creation of an encyclopedia. Therefore, Wikipedia is not a forum for free speech that is not regulated. Our aim is to create an encyclopedia, not to test the limits of anarchism.  . Yes. Wikipedia is a place where we share information we know and discuss it in collaboration with each other. Just as there is no society that is guaranteed full openness, so is Wikipedia.

3. Discussion
There are many vandalism among anonymous users. So, Wikipedia put a certain limit on them. But 'some might argue any effort to block even problematic users is a step away from openness, a chaotic culture of undisciplined vandals would equally disenfranchise those who wish to make a positive contribution to a viable encyclopedic project. The community must undertake a balancing act, one that is difficult, occasionally settled, and then disrupted again.' Although it is a well-balanced act, what do you do when there are users who contribute to Wikipedia rather than vandalism?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W3. Why do you think people use Wikipedia? Why do others write for it? - Sun bo Sim

 Why do you think people use Wikipedia? Why do others write for it? 1. Summary It is quite natural that the main purpose people use Wikipedia is to get information. So I thought about why people choose Wikipedia for getting information. I think the first reason is the reliability of information in Wikipedia. We have many other sources of getting information. We can search for information scattered on the web through search tools such as Google or Naver. But we do not have the ability to ensure that such data are reliable. However, people prefer Wikipedia because it looks at its slogan " The Free Encyclopedia, " believing it may have the character of an encyclopedia. I also believe that Wikipedia's credibility is enhanced by the fact that its information is constantly being edited through the process of collective intelligence. 2. Interesting Point Most people use Wikipedia to get information. However, some people like to make new articles and give information s...
Read more

W5. Can we trust Wikipedia? Yun-Jin Kim

Then I want to ask. Can we trust News? I think Wikipedia is based on sources. Every time we edit on Wikipedia we need the sources. If we don’t put sources, the information we wrote would be deleted.   So I think asking ‘How can we trust Wikipedia’ is kind of similar to ‘How can we trust News’. I know there could be subjective opinion on Wikipedia. If the topic is unpopular, the public opinion doesn’t focus, there’s could be no feedback and that makes Wiki subjective. for this reason, we have to think before we choose the topic in Wiki. If the topic isn’t famous enough and have no sources, we should think this information isn’t sure enough. but if the topic has clear sources we can have a trust on that information. I think it is not important to ask, ‘is the Wikipedia trustful’. It is important to ask ‘is this information on Wikipedia has a exact source?’.
Read more

W6. How important is it to be civil online on the Internet?-Ji Young An

These days lots of controversial problems are rising. And because of those problems, people fight on the Internet. But I think most of problems happen because of a lack of civic attitudes. As I highlighted the discussion section of Wikipedia last post, talking together with having civic attitudes is very important point. On the Internet lots of people meet. And this means all of them has different thinking and experiences different cultures. So it is certain that everyone's opinion is different. But I think from this difference, the collective intelligence comes. So I think this difference is very important. But sadly, because of this difference some people fight, just arguing their opinion is one hundred percent right. This attitude is nothing good to our collective intelligence. To develop collective intelligence, people need the civic attitudes. Not just persisting stubbornly they should talk and listen, trying to understand other people. If they talk their opinion or thinking...
Read more