W12, Discuss Reagle’s chapter 6-Cho jiwon
1.Summary
Open, civil, egalitarian, and deliberative: these are some of the concepts that are encountered in pursuing universal encyclopedias. While it may seem abstractly simple, it becomes much less complex when it is used in community practice and discourse. For example, a perfectly "open" community can be confusing and endangering many people. Or consensus does not require unanimity, consensus may not be reached unanimously or otherwise.
This chapter shows that this parallel arrangement can be understood as an "exclusive" form of leadership in which the dictatorship is exercised excellently by a respected "author" in an open community. What is needed is a "benevolent dictator." No matter how you open the community, you need someone to control the minimum dispute. They usually speak softly to people, relax with humor, and prevent articles or conflicts in the worst case. Two of the most influential figures in Wikipedia history are co-founders of Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales. Wales, co-owner of Bomis, an Internet content and search company, hired Sanger to serve as editor and editor for the Nupedia project in February 2000. Here sanger was a radical dictator style, and Wales had a gentle reign. Wales used perseverance, courtesy, humility, apology, and solidified its power.
Now, besides Wales, there are several administrators, Arbcom and the board of directors as Wikipedia administrators. There is still much controversy as to whether the model of "benevolent dictatorship" is appropriate, and whether the role of constitutional monarchy is appropriate. Therefore, the discussion on this will never cease. And you, as a member of your affiliation, should ponder this.
2.Interesting point
The more people in the community, the more difficult it is to synthesize their opinions. This is because opinions are divided and difficult to integrate. Therefore, there is a need to be determined by the power of some part of the leader. However, if the power becomes strong, dictatorship will arise and it is very important to find the balance between them. In that sense, I think the "benevolent dictator" introduced in this article could be the key to solving the problem.
3.Discussion point
I would like to ask about dictatorship in a context similar to the interesting point. To what extent will dictatorship be allowed for community leadership? And is there a better way to reach an agreement?
Open, civil, egalitarian, and deliberative: these are some of the concepts that are encountered in pursuing universal encyclopedias. While it may seem abstractly simple, it becomes much less complex when it is used in community practice and discourse. For example, a perfectly "open" community can be confusing and endangering many people. Or consensus does not require unanimity, consensus may not be reached unanimously or otherwise.
This chapter shows that this parallel arrangement can be understood as an "exclusive" form of leadership in which the dictatorship is exercised excellently by a respected "author" in an open community. What is needed is a "benevolent dictator." No matter how you open the community, you need someone to control the minimum dispute. They usually speak softly to people, relax with humor, and prevent articles or conflicts in the worst case. Two of the most influential figures in Wikipedia history are co-founders of Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales. Wales, co-owner of Bomis, an Internet content and search company, hired Sanger to serve as editor and editor for the Nupedia project in February 2000. Here sanger was a radical dictator style, and Wales had a gentle reign. Wales used perseverance, courtesy, humility, apology, and solidified its power.
Now, besides Wales, there are several administrators, Arbcom and the board of directors as Wikipedia administrators. There is still much controversy as to whether the model of "benevolent dictatorship" is appropriate, and whether the role of constitutional monarchy is appropriate. Therefore, the discussion on this will never cease. And you, as a member of your affiliation, should ponder this.
2.Interesting point
The more people in the community, the more difficult it is to synthesize their opinions. This is because opinions are divided and difficult to integrate. Therefore, there is a need to be determined by the power of some part of the leader. However, if the power becomes strong, dictatorship will arise and it is very important to find the balance between them. In that sense, I think the "benevolent dictator" introduced in this article could be the key to solving the problem.
3.Discussion point
I would like to ask about dictatorship in a context similar to the interesting point. To what extent will dictatorship be allowed for community leadership? And is there a better way to reach an agreement?
If you look at it simply, the possibility of dictatorship will depend on the acceptability of people. This naturally depends on the social climate in which the dictator appears. It is usually in a poor state. If people can afford it, dictatorship will be hard to come by.
ReplyDelete