W5 Reagle's article -Tae Joon YOO


Wikipedia's information is a product of collective intelligence. Therefore, the information may not be accurate. To solve this, Wikipedia has several devices. What we know before this article is the reference and link function of Wikipedia. This will give credibility to uncertain information due to group intelligence. In addition, in this article, we were able to find out about the device of full agreement. Increase accuracy in articles through agreement on ambiguous information.
 
 I did a lot of Wikipedia editing, but I was not familiar with the function of consensus. This made this article interesting. Without agreement on information, the article would be merely an individual opinion. Then the Wikipedia article is reduced to personal statement, not information that others can refer to. However, it is very difficult for many to agree on any information or opinion and impossible for everyone to agree. In this regard, a system was prepared to reach an agreement by introducing the voting function. What's unique is that when you vote, you pay attention to your opinion rather than the high number of votes. This is not what we generally know about voting. In this regard, I thought Wikipedia's efforts for accuracy and reliability were unique and novel.

It is natural that when people get together and disagreement  arises. It is extremely difficult to overcome such disagreements and reach an agreement, and it takes a lot of time and effort. Right opinions may be ignored, and inaccurate and ambiguous opinions may be preferred by the public. " Consensus" can be very dangerous in that respect. There are many historical examples of problems caused by Consensus. Can an Consensus be the most appropriate way? Is there a better way to increase reliability and accuracy?

Comments

  1. UnknownMay 20, 2018 at 3:18 AM

    It is a very good point. Today, people are very interested in online collaboration. Conflict can arise in this process. In order to solve these problems in the most efficient and democratic way, "consensus" is needed. I thought at first that the consensus was the same as voting. I also thought that it was a consensual decision to make in accordance with the principle of majority rule. In this chapter, however, consensus means paying attention to opinions, not the number of votes. I personally think that consensus is the most important way to resolve various conflicts. In today's society, results are more important than process. By doing so, people get confused and go in a completely different direction. Therefore, I think that it is most important to emphasize the process rather than the result and listen to the opinions of people in this controversy.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W5. Can we trust Wikipedia? - Seron Kim

Wikipedia is a large site used by people all over the world. People get information through Wikipedia and edit article directly when needed. Through the action of collective intelligence, Wikipedia is becoming more and more developed and growing. Can we trust Wikipedia? I think "We can trust Wikipedia but we should not trust it unconditionally.“   Obviously Wikipedia is reliable. Wikipedia itself has an implicit framework for editing, and people follow it and use it. It is also possible to increase the trust of the article by leaving a source for the information, and to delete the edited information through a predetermined process. So there will be more and more reliable information in Wikipedia.   But you should not trust Wikipedia unconditionally. Because there may be misinformation in Wikipedia. Of course, there is a high possibility that it will be fixed through the deletion function of Wikipedia and the collective intelligence of people. But it will be a ...
Read more

W1. What do I know about Wikipedia and what do I want to learn about it? - Yong il, Seon.

We learned another idea, we want an easy explanation.          Many people used Wikipedia. Why people visited Wikipedia? I have much thought about the answer to this question. Everyone will be editor in Wikipedia. So, several people’s opinions can be confirmed on one issue. It is also an important characteristic of democracy. Democracy is the recognition of the other’s ideas. And already in France, there were ‘Tolerance’. It means that As I am right in my opinion, and so you are right in your opinion. I think Wikipedia is making ‘Tolerance idea’ work very well. So, you can not force your own ideas on Wikipedia. Depending on the situation, users may be students, teachers, or even completely different third parties. From these points of view, Wikipedia is the modern version of Greece’s Agora.            And it is not over. Always people want an easy expanation, the more complex the case. Wikipedia has a structured form...
Read more

W2. My first edits. Describe why you made them. - Seron Kim

I rarely had access to Wikipedia before this class. Because there is a service called 'Knowledge in' operated by Naver in Korea. I've been used to the 'Knowledge in' for a long time, so I've always used it if there's something I don't know. However, I got to know Wikipedia in this class. Wikipedia has a much larger volume of data than I thought, and it is being used by people all over the world. Also, anyone could edit information. I want to search and edit my favorite soccer information. So I decided to do the editing on my idols, Ko Jong-soo and Nadson.   What was interesting about editing was that although the Korean Wikipedia was detailed by the players who played in the Korean league, the English Wikipedia had little or no information. So I want to edit more. Because I want to add their information to English Wikipedia to let people around the world know.   Different countries have Wikipedia sites and the amount and quality of informati...
Read more