W12. Discuss Reagle's chapter 6 / posted by Sojeong Yeon

    

1. Summary

 

   In this chapter, the author shows the authorial form of leadership within an open content community, the story of Wales and Sanger, and how the conceptions of its leadership and expectations for the community shaped its direction and culture. Finally, we can see how the community discusses this type of leadership and the values.

  Despite its good-faith collaborative culture, egalitarian ethos, and its openness, Wikipedia has been shaped by authorial leadership. An informal 'benevolent dictator' serves to gently guide the community, to mediate internal disputes between those of good faith, and to defend against those acting in bad faith.

  The leaders often convince by persuasion and example though they also retain charismatic authority accumulated from their merit. As Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) luminary Eric Raymond notes, leaders must be capable of operating with a “soft touch,” to “speak softly,” consult with peers, and “not lightly interfere with or reverse decisions” made by other prominent members. Additionally, humor and civility facilitate camaraderie between all participants and ease the exercise of authority and related anxiety. Finally, prominent leaders might be endowed with the informal moniker of 'benevolent dictator.'

  The cofounders Larry Sanger and Jimmy Wales are the most influential people in the history of Wikipedia. Sanger actually concerned about controlling abusive editors and attacks, particularly when they alienate high-quality expert contributors. He thinks that the project of such a type, productive discussion, can only work without a strong authority and it is important to let people built their own organization. He thinks the role of the editor in chief should disappear to let all the international projects grow up.

  On the other hand, even Wales’s relatively modest editorial contributions are apt to cause concern because the Wikipedia community regards an editor in chief as undesirable. Wales’s leadership is central because of his founding vision, early activity, contributions to collaborative norms, relationships with other Wikipedians, and latent power. He helped establish many of Wikipedia’s good faith culture, Wikipedia’s essential values and norms. For example, in any early discussion about neutral point of view, Wales identifies an important issue and highlights a sentiment he agrees with.

 

  The author talks about the leadership and governance structure of Wikipedia. It is related to Adminstrators, ArbCom, and the Board. The fact that Wikipedia culture values editorial egalitarianism over administrative responsibilities doesn't mean there are no leaders. In the English Wikipedia, there are over 900 active administrators and about a dozen active bureaucrats who appoint administrators and other bureaucrats. Administrators are equal to everybody else in terms of editorial responsibility. They do not have any special authority over other users other than applying decisions made by all users. Stewards can remove arbitrary user access levels on any Wikimedia wiki, but they should not also make policy decisions and should always be neutral.

  Wales delegated some of his authority to an initial five directors of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. The Board has the power to direct the activities of the foundation. In the realm of editorial disputes between users dispute resolution can be facilitated by mediation or arbitration, and the Arbitration Committee(ArbCom) can issue a binding decision. However, it is recommended that disputes be worked out civilly between the participants. Wales further defined his role as a “constitutional monarch.” The main reason why we have retained it is to support and make possible a very open system in which policy is set organically by the community and democratic processes. And institutions emerge over a long period of experimentation and consensus-building.

  Finally, Wales pursues a hybrid of leadership types including autocratic, consultative (the problem is shared with and information collected from the group, before the leader decides alone), and delegated leadership (the problem is shared, ideas are accepted, and the leader accepts the solution supported by the group).

 

2. Interesting thing

 

  The interesting thing is about how such an autocratic statement can be made within an open and consensus-based community. According to author, such authorial leadership is common to many open content communities. The contexts about the environment from which such leadership emerges, how it is enacted, and how it is discussed and understood by the community are interesting.

   And the other interesting thing is the system of administrator and steward. I got to know the roles of them. The administrator can enact Wikipedia policy and group consensus, particularly with respect to the management of protected pages, the deletion of pages, or temporarily blocking sources of vandalism. Just as administrators must not to have extra authority in making editorial decisions, stewards should not make policy decisions. Stewards can remove arbitrary user access levels on any Wikimedia wiki.

 

3. Discussion question

 

  Can a manager and steward exercise his or her authority fairly and objectively? Can they maintain neutrality successfully? Recently, I got several talks from the users who are administrators while using Wikipedia. Because of their mistakes, I had troubles with my editing. I realized that the manager do not always solve the problem smoothly. I agree with the needs of managers, but we have to think about the ways to prevent misjudgment based on their mistakes and prejudices? Is there a guide for efficient sanctions for administrators? How can we do if they abuse or abuse their authority?