Professor Geek

I read a most interesting post on CNET news today regarding the self-organizing nature of Wikipedia. It seems that when you let anyone contribute, there are bound to arise certain disputes over facts. Since one man’s fact is another man’s opinion, it has come to the point, apparently, at Wikipedia, that loose organization has developed a need for arbiters. If you look at a scenario like the TV show Lost, for example, one of the first things that would need to arise would be some sort of court system to handle disputes between individuals. That is exactly what is happening at Wikipedia. Some people are posting “facts” that others consider to be “opinions.” That leads to the need for arbitration, judgment, and a quasi judicial system.

Why is anyone surprised at this? Throughout human history this has been the case and, after all, Wikipedia is nothing more than a miniature society that started out with a common goal and very few rules. I would say that this is only the tip of the iceburg. As anyone who has put together an open source project will tell you, structure and hierarchy are necessary to get the job done. Wikipedia is no different.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.