Browse wiki

Jump to: navigation, search
Coercion or empowerment? Moderation of content in Wikipedia as 'essentially contested' bureaucratic rules
Abstract In communities of user-generated content, In communities of user-generated content, systems for the management of content and/or their contributors are usually accepted without much protest. Not so, however, in the case of Wikipedia, in which the proposal to introduce a system of review for new edits (in order to counter vandalism) led to heated discussions. This debate is analysed, and arguments of both supporters and opponents (of English, German and French tongue) are extracted from Wikipedian archives. In order to better understand this division of the minds, an analogy is drawn with theories of bureaucracy as developed for real-life organizations. From these it transpires that bureaucratic rules may be perceived as springing from either a control logic or an enabling logic. In Wikipedia, then, both perceptions were at work, depending on the underlying views of participants. Wikipedians either rejected the proposed scheme (because it is antithetical to their conception of Wikipedia as a community) or endorsed it (because it is consonant with their conception of Wikipedia as an organization with clearly defined boundaries). Are other open-content communities susceptible to the same kind of 'essential contestation'?.he same kind of 'essential contestation'?.
Abstractsub In communities of user-generated content, In communities of user-generated content, systems for the management of content and/or their contributors are usually accepted without much protest. Not so, however, in the case of Wikipedia, in which the proposal to introduce a system of review for new edits (in order to counter vandalism) led to heated discussions. This debate is analysed, and arguments of both supporters and opponents (of English, German and French tongue) are extracted from Wikipedian archives. In order to better understand this division of the minds, an analogy is drawn with theories of bureaucracy as developed for real-life organizations. From these it transpires that bureaucratic rules may be perceived as springing from either a control logic or an enabling logic. In Wikipedia, then, both perceptions were at work, depending on the underlying views of participants. Wikipedians either rejected the proposed scheme (because it is antithetical to their conception of Wikipedia as a community) or endorsed it (because it is consonant with their conception of Wikipedia as an organization with clearly defined boundaries). Are other open-content communities susceptible to the same kind of 'essential contestation'?.he same kind of 'essential contestation'?.
Bibtextype article  +
Doi 10.1007/s10676-012-9289-7  +
Has author De Laat P.B. +
Has keyword Bureaucracy + , Control + , Empowerment + , Moderation + , Trust + , Vandalism + , Wikipedia +
Issn 13881957  +
Issue 2  +
Language English +
Number of citations by publication 0  +
Number of references by publication 0  +
Pages 123–135  +
Published in Ethics and Information Technology +
Title Coercion or empowerment? Moderation of content in Wikipedia as 'essentially contested' bureaucratic rules +
Type literature review  +
Volume 14  +
Year 2012 +
Creation dateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 8 November 2014 03:20:34  +
Categories Publications without license parameter  + , Publications without remote mirror parameter  + , Publications without archive mirror parameter  + , Publications without paywall mirror parameter  + , Literature reviews  + , Publications without references parameter  + , Publications  +
Modification dateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 8 November 2014 03:20:34  +
DateThis property is a special property in this wiki. 2012  +
hide properties that link here 
Coercion or empowerment? Moderation of content in Wikipedia as 'essentially contested' bureaucratic rules + Title
 

 

Enter the name of the page to start browsing from.