“The idea that a lot of people have of Wikipedia is that it’s some
emergent phenomenon–the wisdom of crowds, swarm intelligence, that sort
of thing… like we’re a lot of ants, working in an anthill,” Jimmy
Wales, the site’s co-founder, has said. “It’s kind of a neat analogy, but it turns out it’s actually not much true.”Wales examined the numbers several years ago and was surprised to
learn that the most active 2 percent of users had performed nearly 75
percent of the edits on the site. “There’s this tight community that is
actually doing the bulk of all the editing,” he said. “I know all of them, and they all know each other.” —The Daily Beast
Similar:
Fun with Kirk and Spock
See the Enterprise. See the Enterprise g...
Amusing
Why I Still Blog
I particularly value blogging because of...
Academia
Tin Man (#StarTrek #TNG Rewatch, Season Three, Episode 20) Sad telepath bonds with starshi...
Rewatching ST:TNG after a 20-year break....
Culture
Male Supporting Characters in Recent Disney Princess Films Dominate the Dialogue
The silly click-baity headline in the Wa...
Business
Disruptive Decorations: Kids learned better in a sparesly-decorated CMU lab
Kids learned better in a sparse lab sett...
Aesthetics
Past Prologue (#StarTrek #DS9 Rewatch, Season 1, Episode 3) A renegade seeking asylum test...
Rewatching ST:DS9 The pilot of a Bajo...
Cyberculture
Good points, Nick. I was on my way out the door when I blogged this and I was considering adding something about how in any reputation-based system, the small percentage of people who find value in doing something for free will do most of it…
I see it in my own classes with blogging — a handful of students who get really into it spend the most time on it, and contribute the most to class discussions, and gain the most. Another chunk of students spend very little time on it, or don’t do it at all — yet they are still likely to complain that it’s too time-consuming.
Thanks for the link to the Swartz article.
These numbers are very old news and have been greatly complicated, if not refuted, in an article by Aaron Swartz. And what is the point of quoting statistics like these in the service of an argument about “democracy,” anyway? The article don’t offer any analysis or discussion of these statistics, and certainly doesn’t make a claim about what percentage of users doing what percentage of edits would be democratic.