May 9, 2003

defending wikis

Wikis seem to becoming more and more popular. Or perhaps i'm just spending too much time entrenched in the philosophy of the social software folks. In any case, i was trying to discuss them with a friend of mine and we both have our concerns about them. Not being able to defend them and unaware of where to go for a really good and trusted defense, i decided to write to two gurus whose views fascinate me. But i'd also love to hear perspectives from anyone foolish enough to stumble on this site. Here's what i wrote:

So, i'd love to hear your arguments of why wikis are the latest greatest social software (or pointers to folks who can defend this vantage point).

Particular issues that we're struggling with and trying to figure out how to process...

1) History means more than persistence. When we're collaborating offline, we leave lots of traces of our use, of our presences, etc. What is the value in a no-trace environment like wikis? How is this an advantage?

2) Social kudos often motivate people to participate. Being recognized for their voice. More importantly, it motivates folks to be more articulate, more conscientious, etc. How is it an advantage to not have voices attached with text? What is gained and lost?

3) In collaboration where everyone is motivated to "do right", there's little motivation to sabatage others' efforts. But if you've ever seen teenagers collaborate, dear me oh my. Can we say that it is an exercise in cruelness to force collaboration on teens in middle school? How are stuctures built so as to discourage malicious intentions?

4) In collaborations, there is often a lot of rituals of getting to know one another, particularly if there is not a history of past relations. How do wikis support unknown colleagues to get involved?

Category: social software

Posted by zephoria at May 9, 2003 10:39 PM | TrackBack