I was reading about Hayek and Wales in the recent reasononline article. It covered the free flow of information and a market-like mechanism that leads to the product of good articles. I think Wales would agree when I write that, these things are the Goose that laid the Golden Egg that is Wikipedia. I think these things, (free flow of information, market-like mechanism) are vital to Wikipedia's success.

So if we assume Wales is right, the next question I have is, what is the admins role here? If they had one role, one goal higher than all the others, what would it be?

To preserve the Goose. Once information is no longer freely flowing, and the market-like mechanism is now the cabal-like mechanism, Wikipedia is toast. I recognize the uniqueness of WP, but if it fails, WP will be replaced by another wiki. Those that know markets know that you can't stop competition. You have to do a better job than the next guy, or rely on a market intervention or distortion to save your under performing self.

Another thing about markets is that you prefer low transaction costs. The well known disputes within Wikipedia are examples of high transactions costs. One needs to make the product and not spend all day arguing with whomever will argue back. WP has been able to absorb these costs because it uses volunteers. I understand some conflict is necessary and desired, but it can and does reach the destructive level at times.

So I think Wikipedia's future depends on having admins that recognize what it is that makes WP successful and applying that to what they do. For them to be producers rather than destroyers. But then again, I am just some crazy libertarian.

 

What did you think of this article?

Liked
Disliked
No Opinion