Skip to main content

Home/ Net 308/508 Internet Collaboration and Organisation S1 2012/ Group items tagged participatory

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Jarrad Long

Sell Your Experiences: A Market Mechanism based Incentive for Participatory Sensing - 14 views

http://www.csee.usf.edu/~labrador/Share/PapersToRead/GameTheory/Incentive%20participation.pdf (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) Beyond the technological challenges that face participatory s...

Net308_508 collaboration crowd-sourcing participatory sensing

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
theresia sandjaja

YouTube as a participatory culture - 1 views

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/...pdf

Net308_508 social interactions Youtube Crowd participatory Collaboration

shared by theresia sandjaja on 25 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • theresia sandjaja on 25 Mar 12
     
    The introduction of this chapter captivated me because it defined that Youtube is not just a media space for user to consume media but it acts as a platform that provides social networking framework which enable young people to create and share original content while making social connection virtually. This article explains how Youtube has created a participatory culture within young people. The easy and interactive features in Youtube have enabled young people to be pro-active within the online community. By collaborating online through Youtube, young people can express their identity through their creativity, seek support from peers (either from family, close friend or even strangers who have similar interest), learn new skills by watching other people tutorial and engage in public space.  To understand how Youtube enables participatory culture, this article provides thorough explanations on how the framework is supported. There are five different characteristics that form participatory culture in Youtube, these are: low barrier of artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing project, informal setting of mentorship, belief of the importance of contributions and a sense of social connection. These characteristics illustrate how Youtube users especially young people engage to communicate and exchange ideas with other users virtually. 
  • theresia sandjaja on 25 Mar 12
     
    Source: Chau, C. (2010), YouTube as a participatory culture. New Directions for Youth Development, 2010: 65-74. Available online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/yd.376/pdf
  • samara hartnett on 04 Apr 12
     
    I found the statistical information in this article very revealing and insightful. But I did find it hard to place within the overall topic. The ability for youth to 'explore identity' and 'acquire new skills' as the article states, are themes that seem to be synonymous when youth cultures are in focus. With this in mind I would assume that this article has relevance to the Knowledge Production and Higher Education topic. I was particularly interested when the article explained the affects that commenting on videos and video view counts can have on video production. As they highlight 'feedback interactions' are crucial to motivating users to create new content. This could either be a new video or increasing circulation of a video with in the community. Just recently there has been a lot of focus on adolescent users of you tube in the media (3 high school girls suspended due to a video they uploaded to youTube). It is no wonder that the participatory nature, or non- participatory (viewing but not creating or commenting) nature of youTube appeals so much to a youth culture. YouTube simply provides a non-confrontation space where youth can determine their own level of participation enabling it to be used as tools for knowledge production and Higher Education. However as the ability for videos to go viral increases and the frontiers of social media expand, I worry the 'empowerment' of youthTubers isn't being backed up by public broadcasting education and as with all higher education, there needs to be a basic level of knowledge already in place and a set of standards.
Jarrad Long

Become a Citizen Scientist - 10 views

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/imagine/20110506_DMI/index.php?startid=10 (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) This article describes a suite of participatory sensing apps developed at UCLA th...

Net308_508 collaboration crowd-sourcing participatory sensing

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Jarrad Long

TxtEagle Raises $8.5 Million To Give 2.1 Billion a Voice - 7 views

http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/12/txteagle-raises-8-5-million/ (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) While most people would associate mobile crowd-sourcing with the developed world (after all,...

Net308_508 crowd-sourcing participatory sensing collaboration

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Jarrad Long

Nericell: Rich Monitoring of Road and Traffic Conditions using Mobile Smartphones - 5 views

http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/78568/Nericell-Sensys2008.pdf (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) Written by three researchers from Microsoft Research India, this article explores the idea...

Net308_508 collaboration crowd-sourcing participatory sensing

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Emily Lloyd

Resource 1: Good Faith Collaboration by J.M. Reagle Jr - 3 views

reagle.org/...chapter-3.html

Net308_508 Net508 Collaboration Wikipedia participatory wikis community organisations Collaborative Resource Development J.M. Reagle Jr Cass Sunstein Neutral Point of View NPOV culture James Surowiecki The Wisdom of Crowds

shared by Emily Lloyd on 25 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • Emily Lloyd on 25 Mar 12
     
    In chapter three of Good Faith Collaboration: Culture of Wikipedia, J.M. Reagle Jr provides a utopian vision of Wikipedia's collaborative community. Reagle Jr uses the work of Cass Sunstein to demonstrate that the collaboration process is not free of conflict, and as with other types of communities both, "consensus and dissensus each have an important, and unavoidable, role in community" (Sunstein cited in Reagle Jr, 2011, para. 5). While referring to Wikipedia's policy and guidelines, Reagle Jr suggests that by applying a "Neutral Point of View" (NPOV) to the subject matter and practising good faith towards the other contributors, it is possible to achieve a successful collaborative culture (Reagle Jr, 2011, para. 103). This chapter is a useful resource for the study of Wikipedia as an example of an online collaborative tool, as it argues that collaborative communities can function effectively as long as they have a cultural framework to ensure productivity. I also believe this is a useful resource, as it provides a very positive view of collaboration and the work of the Wikipedia community, supporting Surowiecki's idea of 'the wisdom of crowds' (Surowiecki, 2004, p. 5). It is also interesting to compare this article's view on collaboration to the second resource I have chosen, Digital Maoism (Lanier, 2006).
  • Emily Lloyd on 25 Mar 12
     
    References Lanier, J. (2006). Digital Maoism. Retrieved from http://edge.org/3rd_culture/lanier06/lanier06_index.html Reagle Jr, J.M. (2011). Good Faith Collaboration. In J.M. Reagle Jr, Good Faith Collaboration: Culture of Wikipedia (Online Edition, Chapter 3). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Retrieved from http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/chapter-3.html Surowiecki, J. (2004). The wisdom of crowds: Why the many are smarter than the few. New York, NY: Doubleday.
ianzed

Making the News: Movement Organisations, Media attention and the public agenda - 18 views

This article very loosely relates to my focus on Anonymous. Although not particularly relevant to my focus, it does provide a decent contextual setting for explaining why Anonymous receives so much...

Net308_508 collaboration community Crowd participatory

started by Jannicke Rye on 25 Mar 12 3 follow-ups, last by ianzed on 10 Apr 12
Tamlin Dobrich

Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? - 8 views

www.time.com/...0,9171,1924492,00.html

Net308_508 collaboration community Crowd Wikipedia participatory

shared by Tamlin Dobrich on 25 Mar 12 - Cached
  • Tamlin Dobrich on 25 Mar 12
     
    Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? is an article which suggests Wikipedia's achievement level has reached its peak and eventually will see its downfall. The article looks in depth at the potential causes for Wikipedia's slowing growth and how these elements could possibly lead to the community's eventual failure. It suggests one reason for Wikipedia's decelerating growth rate is simply that "the site has hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion" and the only possible remaining contributions are obscure topics and "janitorial" editing job such as formatting and fixing grammar. The article claims "Wikipedia's natural resource is emotion" and editors are motivated by the "rush of joy" they receive when contributing their unique wisdom to an audience of 300 million people. What this means is that as the need for significant edits diminishes, so too does participation enthusiasm. Additionally, as Wikipedia has grown, so too has the bureaucracy and complex laws of Wikipedia, resulting in a community that has become unwelcoming to novice Wikipedians. The article discusses how Wikipedia editors are made up of a narrow class of participants dominated by young males from wealthy countries and academic backgrounds. The Wikipedia author-base is not as broad and diverse as first thought and it seems "the encyclopedia is missing the voices of people in developing countries, women and experts in various specialties that have traditionally been divorced from tech". This too is given as a reason for Wikipedia's imminent downfall.
  • ...5 more comments...
  • Dean Strautins on 25 Mar 12
     
    An interesting topic of diminishing contributors and a conclusion I had already theorised must be happening for the exact theories stated in the article. I think this article will be good to reflect on in future years. Maybe a future article will be on If You Do Not Innovate Then You Die. I see Wikipedia only having to start including a genealogy aspect where everyone can geo tag relatives grave sites and stories about then and their relatives and what they achieved in their life to see a boom in contributors and tie all the history in Wikipedia to real every day people. So when I read in Wikipedia about a civil war or history of a country I can also choose to see who's firends relatives were there at that time etc. Later DNA results can further be added. So I do not see Wikipedia dying if it Innovates.
  • Emily Lloyd on 06 Apr 12
     
    Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? is an interesting article, as it suggests that since 2007, the number of people contributing to Wikipedia has decreased (Manjoo, 2009, para. 2). This is further reinforced by the following graph from the Wikipedia website (http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMFArticlesVsContrib.png), which also shows that the number of contributors is plateauing (Bridgestone Partners, 2009). Farhad Manjoo's explanation for this - that the encyclopedia has "hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion" and the only editing jobs left are 'janitorial' - seems plausible (Manjoo, 2009, para. 6). Personally, this is what I have found through my own use of Wikipedia, that while there are areas which need some work, they are generally topics and jobs which are rather mundane. The success of collaborative projects does rest on ensuring the contributors are enthusiastic about what they are doing, in order for them to continue to produce quality contributions (Anthony, Smith & Williamson, 2007). One of the resources I chose for this assignment further reinforces this. Katherine Ehmann, Andrew Large and Jamshid Beheshti in Collaboration in Context: Comparing Article Evolution among Subject Disciplines in Wikipedia find that through their research, an average of 90.3 percent of the initial Wikipedia article text remained over time (Ehmann et al., 2008, para. 40). Therefore, it seems that contributors are less inclined to change a great deal of the original entry, and if Manjoo's suggestions are correct, and Wikipedia does already cover the majority of the topics required by users, there is less chance that contributors will continue to go back and edit these existing entries. As Dean Strautins suggests in the comment above, Wikipedia may need to look into new ways of continuing to engage their contribu
  • Emily Lloyd on 06 Apr 12
     
    References Anthony, D., Smith, S.W., & Williamson, T. (2007) The Quality of Open Source Production: Zealots and Good Samaritans in the Case of Wikipedia. Dartmouth Computer Science Technical Report TR2007-606. Retrieved from http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/reports/TR2007-606.pdf Bridgestone Partners. (2009). File: WMFArticlesVsContrib.png. Retrieved from http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMFArticlesVsContrib.png Ehmann, K., Large, A., & Beheshti, J. (2008). Collaboration in Context: Comparing Article Evolution among Subject Disciplines in Wikipedia. First Monday, 13(10). Retrieved from: http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2217/2034 Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success?. Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1924492,00.html
  • FARNAZ SHAMS on 06 Apr 12
     
    This article is related to my topic and starts with a brief summary of Wikipedia's start. Wikipedia started its work in 2001 and allowed Wikipedians to contribute and share their articles with others through it. Wikipedia increased its article slowly, in 2008 there were about 2200 articles being added to the Wikipedia every day and in 2009 Wikipedia had about 3 million articles in English. So, Wikipedia broken the record held by Chinese Yongle encyclopedia, which was the famous encyclopedia. The article mentioned, there are thousands of active volunteers who are editing articles or publishing new articles, volunteers check articles to correct them and make them more valid. In addition, in Wikipedia some topics absorb large number of people, for example, subject like "Barack Obama" has large number of viewers, however, other articles which are about other ordinary people do not have that much viewers, and this is a big hole for Wikipedia, because it needs to update these kind of subjects too. The article mentions, In Wikipedia's early days volunteers could be easily be staff of Wikipedia and editing or publishing the articles was not hard, but now volunteers should obey some rules and volunteers must gather some credit to get permission from Wikipedia to publish their articles, so, volunteers may think why should they contribute in Wikipedia and these rsule may decrease the volunteers of Wikipedia.
  • Mitchell Houwen on 07 Apr 12
     
    The change in the rate of publishing material does not determine the success of a project such as Wikipedia. New material will be sourced for Wikipedia because the world is constantly evolving. Wikipedia's only downfall is the amount of people that contribute. When Wikipedia articles are monitored by users the mediators can control their own page which they see as perfection because they have written majority of it. This is the exact reason why people have begun to shy away from adding or editing Wikipedia pages. Does this mean however that Wikipedia will fail at some point? I believe nothing could be further from the truth. I think Wikipedia will simply run in cycles as new topics are generated therefore new experts will be required to moderate and new people needed to add subject matter. As more people begin to collaborate on these pages more and more people will feel confident to edit themselves. Think of the Wikipedia cycle as one that is constantly changing with both highs and lows of activity. This current inactive period will not last long. This unit looks at the collaborative process that is being undertaken throughout the web and it is important to understand that without people adding their own pieces the puzzle is never going to be finished. Will Wikipedia run the cycle as my theory predicts?
  • michelangelo magasic on 08 Apr 12
     
    This article brings up a very interesting idea: the concept of an endpoint for Web 2.0 communities. As the author relates it, this would occur as a Malthusian collapse. Whilst at first glance this seems unfeasible given the infinite expanse of virtual pastures, the article makes some interesting points for consideration: the number of contributors on Wikipedia is dropping and it seems the we have run out of topics to write. It is interesting to compare the Wikipedia community to that of Bittorrent which has found renewed growth, and purpose, in the context of its struggle against copyright laws. Wikipedia has been hailed as a revolutionary form of knowledge democratisation, it is hard to imagine that wikipedians don't share a sense of purpose in their collaboration, and, perhaps even harder to imagine that we are running out of things to write about. Whilst this article is from a highly reputable source, its bias might be considered in following that of the conservative media toward copyleft, this is highlighted by phrases like 'Wikipedia's joyride' which suggests the growth of the site as frivolous. Considering the data it presents, the article is certainly very relevant to an understanding of online collaboration and thought provoking. I cannot help but think that there are still multitudes of topics to be written about, how many contributors, for example, have penned a page for themselves? Whilst ostensibly trivial, this might be the kind of interaction that sees renewed interest in the site and attracts the minority demographics which Gardner says the site needs to make its community richer (p.2). Perhaps the flagging interest in the site comes from the reason that the site is moving too close to the status quo, that as the BitTorrent community has seen, it needs to reminded of its position in an ideological shift.
  • FARNAZ SHAMS on 10 Apr 12
     
    This article starts with a brief summary of Wikipedia's start. Wikipedia started its work in 2001 and allowed Wikipedia's to contribute and share their articles with others through it. Wikipedia increased its article slowly, in 2008 there were about 2200 articles being added to the Wikipedia every day and in 2009 Wikipedia had about 3 million articles in English. So, Wikipedia broken the record held by Chinese Yongle encyclopedia, which was the famous encyclopedia (Manjoo, 2009). According to my own studies, Wikipedia has different level of articles; they divided to low-, medium- and high quality and different people must play different roles, such as linking, editing and writing. For example, cleaning up other editor's mistake is a very important part, because some people do not add valuable information and some editors must come to increase articles quality and maybe the article needs another editor to correct the article again and this process may need to continue many times to increase quality of that article. However, that does not mean casual users work is not worthy, because, they can absorb more well-rounded contributors to make more valuable articles. To help contributors, University of Arizona suggested Wiki software, which guides contributors to know what should they do, for example, they will aware the article needs more link, references or it needs more editing and writing (Conger, 2010). Conger, C. (2010). Who writes Wikipedia articles? Retrieved from http://news.discovery.com/human/wikipedia-community-articles.html
Dean Strautins

How organisations framed the 2009 H1N1 pandemic via social and traditional media - 5 views

This paper dazzles me with non stop cramming of terms and references. I simply can not hold all those reference points in my head at the one and same time to be able to come up with insightful lear...

Net308_508 community social media Crowd participatory technology

started by Jannicke Rye on 25 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by Dean Strautins on 25 Mar 12
Jarrad Long

Reips, U-D & Garaizar, P. (2011) Mining Twitter: A source for psychological wisdom of t... - 10 views

This article discusses the usefulness of Twitter as a tool for research. Researcher Pablo Garaizar suggests that monitoring large volumes of tweets and identifying trends in what users are saying -...

Net308_508 collaboration Crowd participatory

started by Jannicke Rye on 25 Mar 12 2 follow-ups, last by Jarrad Long on 08 Apr 12
Velia Torres

Interactive of reactive? Marketing with Twitter - 15 views

This paper aims to analyse the effectiveness of Twitter usage across six different organisations, holding twelve different Twitter accounts. Despite the high amount of organisations using Twitter t...

Net308_508 collaboration community Crowd participatory technology

started by Jannicke Rye on 25 Mar 12 1 follow-up, last by Velia Torres on 06 Apr 12
theresia sandjaja

Communicating Creativity on YouTube: What and for Whom? - 1 views

online.liebertpub.com/...cyber.2011.0401

Net308_508 Crowd Youtube social interactions participatory

shared by theresia sandjaja on 25 Mar 12 - No Cached
  • theresia sandjaja on 25 Mar 12
     
    Youtube has lowered the barriers for amateurs to upload their video online, this allows users to share content to large scale of audience. This article explores on how nonprofessional users connect to the mass at many different levels. Based on the quantitative research in this article there are combination of elements that contribute to the usage of Youtube: primary level by identifying the video narrative content from as expressing idea or opinion to displaying skills (music, sports, etc.) and secondary level by analysing the creativity made by the users and whether the production of creativity covey message about the uploader's personality traits.  The first study analyse the varieties of narrative contents uploaded in Youtube. The contents available consist from personal creativity that contain self-made sound and images, remix creativity containing both self made footage and drawing on popular culture, and borrowed creativity that consists third party performances that were rarely edited The study on the second level analyse the personality traits of the uploader which classified into: actual and ideal self when opening their personality to the audience in the online environment.   Youtube producers use their creations to connect socially by uploading their videos and sharing them to the public. This highlighted the needs of 'strong social orientation and the desire to engage in social interaction' within online environment. The collective works available on Youtube has blurred the line between authors and audiences, creators and consumers as well as experts and amateurs. 
  • theresia sandjaja on 25 Mar 12
     
    Source: Courtois C., Mechant P., De Marez L. (2012) Communicating creativity on YouTube: what and for whom? Cyberphsychology, behavior and social networking. March 2012, 15(3): 129-134. Available online through Curtin Library Since the publication quite recent, to access this reading please go to Curtin Library catalogue and find the article through journal name.
1 - 12 of 12
Showing 20▼ items per page