W5/The Challenges of Consensus/HARI KIM

The Challenges of Consensus


Summary)

Wikipedia is a space where you create an encyclopedia through collaboration. Wikipedia requires consensus decisions in the process of creating information together. However, there are possible misunderstandings about consensus and difficulties in decision-making practices in the open community. 

First, what is an consensus? Consensus do not mean unanimity. Consensus have comprehensive characteristics with as many stakeholders as possible, cooperative characteristics that reach the best possible decision for all members, and participatory, egalitarian characteristics, etc. This consensus appears to be an appropriate means of making decisions in communities and online collaboration. Wikipedia is run by discussion-oriented consensus. So Wikipedians often refer to the maxim "voting is evil," although consensus can be difficult, and view it as undermining consensus, unfair and encouraging confusion. Some believe that voting represents division, and consensus strengthens the unity of the group.  But consensus through debate is not a panacea for the difficulties of decision-making. "Ultimately, the decision is more of an unpleasant one for the least number of people," Sidaway said. However, Wikipedia has concluded that it is tolerant of these difficulties inherent in collaboration and trusts human judgment.


New/Interesting things I learned)

There are also numerous conflicts in the real world where we live. Therefore, an appropriate consensus is needed. I learned that the process of reaching an consensus is a very vague and complicated process because all group members should be taken seriously. The negative aspects of the vote were also interesting. I had thought that consensus through voting was the most positive, but I could think that voting could be dangerous because it could completely exclude minority opinions.  It was also interesting to say that voting may be a process of reaching an consensus, but it is more likely to be the beginning of another debate.


Discussion Point)

I think there will be pros and cons of each consensus through debate and consensus through voting. Depending on the issue, there are times when discussions are needed and votes are needed. Decisions through discussion can take a lot of time. Voting decisions can be made quickly but not equal. I wonder your opinion on the pros and cons of each debate and vote.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

  Review of Good Faith Collaboration 1) Summary – Wikipedia from an ethnographic perspective: focusing on collaboration within the community Wikipedia, which is called the world's largest encyclopedia, is an open community and is becoming more and more solid with the participation of various people, conflict, and resolution. In this respect, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. attempted to explain the culture that takes place within Wikipedia. The book describes how Wikipedia was created and what it values. In particular, he described Wikipedia in a book from an ethnographic point of view, and focused on cooperation within the community. 2) Interesting Point – Wikipedia is simple, but not I realized that Wikipedia is not just a site made up of community activities, but rather a collaborative activity that is carried out concretely for the goal. Before I read the book, Wikipedia was an encyclopedia site that only gave me information (even I didn't trust the information), and I thought ...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more