Lessons of Wikipedia

Zittrain's article "Lessons of Wikipedia" delves into the difference between rules and standard on Wikipedia, and how this differentiation contributes to the overall success and uniqueness of Wikipedia as a whole. The article discusses how when one is given a set of rules to follow, then it is easy to have the tendency to want to rebel against these rules. It is a simple factor of human nature. Rules are meant to be broken. But when you give a user, or really any person for that matter, a "standard" then one feels given a lot more inherent control and freedom. As Cheyanne quotes in her blog post "Rules are less subject to ambiguity, and if crafted well, inform people exactly what they can do, even if individual situations render impractical, or worse, dangerous." It is in this way that Wikipedia exists in harmony as a freely edited, yet source checked encyclopedia. Users uphold the standard of good content simply for the fact that they feel more apart of that standard itself.


Cheyanne references the photos included by Hooks, which provide a standard for what a correct and incorrect Wikipedia article would look like. These photos exist as an accessible and beneficial resource for anybody who may want to contribute to the site, and therefore further add the the availability of content editing. This accessibility is at the very core of the Wikipedia goal.


One of the most important concepts that is further discussed by Zittrain's article is the idea of the the unspoken "cyber laws." As Zittrain calls it and Cheyanne quotes, "In modern cyberspace, an absence of rules (or at least enforcement) has lead both to a generative blossoming and to a new round of challenges at multiple layers." These "laws" both construct the freedom of the internet, but also act as a bit of a weakness as well. In theory, if users can follow cyber laws then the internet can exist without problem. But if these laws are not followed and the trust of cyber law is broken, it is easy for things to unravel into chaos. Kind of like how communism could be really great in theory if nobody was selfish, but people are and therefore the execution tends to be flawed.


The internet's inherent sense of fair chance of opportunity helps for any person to rise a position of authority amongst the Wikipedia community, which would be that of an administrator. Sort of like the modern american dream in a sense but without the meritocracy myth that plagues the reality of success for those less fortunate. Wikipedia holds a distinct emphasis on the community of teamwork (writers, editors, administrators, etc) whose work allows for a project like this to exist.