W12. Discuss Reagle's chapter 6. ByoungHyun Chun(천병헌)

W12. Discuss Reagle's chapter 6

Information sociology

2015048986 천병헌

1. Summary

  This chapter is about the Benevolent Dictator.  
 Unlike the purity of a utopian dream, Wikipedians must reconcile their vision with the inescapable social reality of irritating personalities, philosophical differences, and external threats. Despite its good-faith collaborative culture, its egalitarian ethos, and its openness — or because of it — 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. At this point, he or she may achieve a significant amount of symbolic status within the community or even outside attention. However, when a person comes to be responsible for more than he or she can do by dint of will alone, new responsibilities and authority pull taut a tightrope that must be carefully walked before the eyes of one’s peers. Sanger’s reflections about his exit from the community and continued discussion about Wales’s role are testaments to how delicately the tin crown of such leadership must be balanced.

2. Interesting point

  Wikipedia is the best place for collective intelligence. There are a lot of people who actually use Wikipedia. People are still working on Wikipedia editing right now. However, personally I have found some limitations with Wikipedia. 
  First, there are many people who participate in Wikipedia, but most of them have a passive attitude. Only a few people edit with an active attitude. Under these circumstances, a dictator with an influence on information can abuse or use it at his disposal. Of course the role of benevolent dictators is important. As we learned about the agreement in the last chapter, it is most important to respect the opinions of people to control the role of a dictator.  
  Secondly, the authority of a dictator is a question of how far he can be recognized. Often, people who have a lot of information in editing actual trivial information ignore the opinions of those who do not. At this time, I wonder where their authority came from in an open space. In some ways, their authority makes Wikipedia's collaborative culture worse.

3. Discussion point

  Even now, editing is happening in an open space like Wikipedia. People present various opinions, modify information, and debate. But there is also a dictator among them. Their role is very important. They teach that they can mediate in the process of agreement, keep good manners and respect. But we always have to be careful. The authority of a dictator is a legitimate power. If we leave their authority uncritical, they can act their own way. What if we just blindly acknowledge and leave their power or authority? And who did their authority come from?