| Dominique Cardon|
(Alternative names for this author)
|Affiliation||France Telecom R&D|
|Authorship||Publications (2), datasets (0), tools (0)|
|Citations||Total (3), average (1.5), median (1.5), max (2), min (1)|
|DBLP · Google Scholar|
|Export and share|
|BibTeX, CSV, RDF, JSON|
|Browse properties · List of authors|
PublicationsOnly those publications related to wikis are shown here.
|Title||Keyword(s)||Published in||Language||DateThis property is a special property in this wiki.||Abstract||R||C|
|Discipline but not punish. the governance of Wikipedia||Normative Experience in Internet Politics||English||2012||The ways in which the Internet is managed and controlled–often labeled as Internet Governance– are usually considered as standing on four main pillars: Technology, Market Laws, State Regulation and Uses. Nevertheless, its specific features, the consequences of the plurality of norms it involves and of the decision-making processes it entails are rarely addressed in a comprehensive analysis.
This book explores the Internet’s functioning both as a practical-intellectual experience and a political challenge. By means of several case studies, it proposes a substantial and reflexive treatment of multileveled, formal or informal Internet Politics.The book’s overall endeavor is to outline an understanding ofwhat is –or may be– a “digital common good”.The authors are members of a European academic team gathered by the Vox Internet research program’s meetings. They adopt a multi-disciplinary approach, embedding technological innovation in the fi eld of social sciences (communication studies, sociology, law, political science and philosophy).
|La vigilance participative||Réseaux||French||2009||This article proposes an interpretation of the Wikipedia model of coordination and governance, focused on the forms of vigilance that Wikipedians use to monitor and control other contributors. Wikipedia’s procedural system of self-regulation solves conflicts through discussion, mediation and sanctions, by organizing tension between the local control of statements and the centralized measures against those who repeatedly contravene the encyclopaedia’s principles. The authors describe the architecture of the arenas and rules that make it possible to solve publishing conflicts without transgressing the principle of an unconditional openness to everyone’s right to contribute and to monitor others.||18||2|