If 60% agreement is not sufficient to approve a test, then it is time someone took important decisions out of the hands of (physical and intellectual) children and let the grownups take over.That should, however, go for decisions implemented every day across the site. The bottom line is that the communal model--of anything--is not scalable. Wikipedia triply so. All the communes in the 60's went tits-up because nobody wanted to muck out the privy and would rather argue about how to decide the process by which they'd figure out the best way to examine the issue of who should be mucking out the privy.
When you put it all together, the story become clear: an outsider makes one edit to add a chunk of information, then insiders make several edits tweaking and reformatting it. In addition, insiders rack up thousands of edits doing things like changing the name of a category across the entire site — the kind of thing only insiders deeply care about. As a result, insiders account for the vast majority of the edits. But it’s the outsiders who provide nearly all of the content.posted by TheophileEscargot at 3:24 PM on January 27, 2009
Wikipedia is an honor culture. Honor cultures are defined by anthropologists as cultures in which three conditions exist: 1. Lack of resources 2. Lack of an effective state, or law enforcement 3. Bad behavior goes un-punished and/or is rewarded. Typically honor cultures are places like Appalachia America (Hatfield and McCoys) or the Scottish Highlands. They are characterized by feuding and gangs. HC's also exist in inner city youth gangs. How is Wikipedia an honor culture? 1. Lack of resources. For any article, there is limited "real estate", there is only one article and everyone must fight over their contribution to it. 2. Lack of an effective state. For the most part, users are required to stick up for themselves - if someone wrongs you, you are expected to take action on your own. One normally can't just call up the police to resolve a dispute. 3. Bad behavior pays. For the most part, one can typically get away with a lot of Wikipedia by behaving badly when it pays to do so. Honor Cultures are violent prone places. They breed strife and conflict.It needs a lot more clarity but wanted to keep it short, general idea here is that Wikipedia is an uncivil place. Not uncivil in the sense of "rude", but uncivil in the sense of 17th century Scotland, or present day Afghanistan. The solution is Wikipedia needs a stronger central authority that can better enforce its policies - just as Afghanistan needs a stronger government.
« Older Who watches the Watchmen? The New Frontiersman fo... | Ben Burtt... heard the name? W... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Brian B. at 6:41 AM on January 27, 2009 [3 favorites]