WEEK 5. Bruns B.

When collaborative sites have moderation functions to prevent a ‘free for all’, does this defeat the purpose?

I think there is plenty of evidence that the basics of human nature, without some sort of structure or leadership, are likely to create some sort of anarchy. As Bruns calls it in terms of collaborative websites, ‘a leaderless anarchy’ (Bruns, p4). Although there is some logical contradiction in the idea of a collaborative website where everyone has an say such as Wiki’s or collaborative news and moderation, many examples spring to mind of times when lack of moderation has caused such anarchy. Wikipedia frequently sources celebrity death rumours which often turn out to be hoaxes but have been believed until moderation is enforced. Such deliberately damaging input to such sites may be for many reasons but I think it can be quite simply put down to the individuals at blame enjoying the power of supplying such information and witnessing the anarchy which ensues. Moderation is certainly needed if these sites are to have any credibility authority in the information they provide. Failing this moderation they would be rendered useless, in my opinion.