Assignment 2 Submissions: Difference between revisions

From Technologies and Politics of Control
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 106: Line 106:


[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 09:47, 25 February 2014 (EST)
[[User:Dancoron|Dancoron]] 09:47, 25 February 2014 (EST)
:Hello, Dan! Admittedly, I had never heard of “Anandtech.com” prior to reading your prospectus, but I’m glad that you told me about it. I really like their “Cable TVification” assessment of the internet in recent years. After reading your prospectus it seems to me that you are focusing on Lessig’s norms as regulators within the site’s forums, as well as “laws" instituted by the website. It is an interesting subject, because as you say, this particular forum is very successful in fostering an environment where users are likely to return. That said, I see that you qualify users of the site as “good,” and I’m curious to know how you will operationalize this term for your project. You mention words like “courteous” and “helpful,” but I’m wondering: what characteristics do you think you will look for when observing, in order to qualify a “good user.” For comparison, do you have an example of what behavior that “bad” users might entail? Lastly, I see that there are literally millions of post on the forum; you may wish to focus on a specific topic and/or date range in order to have a more manageable data set to observe. I’m interested to see what you’re project will entail, especially being that I am also observing forums for my project. [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 23:00, 1 March 2014 (EST)


----
----
Line 317: Line 319:
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Patricia_Byrnes_Assig._Two.doc
*http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Patricia_Byrnes_Assig._Two.doc
[[User:TriciaBy|TriciaBy]] 16:59, 25 February 2014 (EST)
[[User:TriciaBy|TriciaBy]] 16:59, 25 February 2014 (EST)
:Patricia, First off, love your idea, moderating internet speech, as well as your methodology: if what you want to measure is moderating behavior, norms, and free speech concerns, the “Politics & Leaders” forum is a fantastic place to do so since It appears that discussions there can turn from heated to vituperative in the blink of an eye! With respect to your research question, by specifying “effective,” I assume that you will quantify instances of behavior that violate the established rules of the site. This method is good since you give yourself a verifiable and quantifiable measure. You can then use Lessig’s and other scholars work to explain these data. Now, you say that you wish to "research the rules and regulations of the site,” which looks like it might be an insurmountable task. I visited the site’s “Super Editor handbook” and I see that it is quite extensive. Perhaps you might want to focus specifically on one type of violation, such as "3.4.1 Discouraged Ranking Themes - Personal Experience / Personal Preference Rankings” ? [[User:Vance.puchalski|Vance.puchalski]] 23:00, 1 March 2014 (EST)


-------
-------

Revision as of 23:00, 1 March 2014

Assignments

Assignment 1 Details and Reporting | Submissions
Due February 10

Assignment 2 | Submissions
Due March 3

Working in a group?
Let us know by March 24

Assignment 3 | Submissions
Due March 31

Assignment 4 | Submissions
Due April 28

Extra Credit | Submissions
Due May 5

Final Project | Submissions
Due May 12

Submission Instructions

Please note that we have updated the final project page's FAQ section based on some student questions that have come to us over the past week.

This assignment is due on February 25. Grading for this assignment is on a 5-point scale; late assignments will be docked 1 point for each day they are late (assignments submitted 4 days late or later will have a maximum grade of 1 point).

Please name your file "wikiusername_Assignment2," where "wikiusername" is replaced with your username, to avoid overwriting someone else's assignment or causing errors in the Wiki by including forbidden characters. So if your username is "jdoe" and your file is a Word document your file should be named "jdoe_Assignment2.doc."

Upload your rough draft here: Upload file. If you have trouble finding the file you uploaded, check the list of uploaded files.

In the submissions section below please post the following information:

  • Name or pseudonym:
  • Prospectus title:
  • Link to prospectus: (add your link here)

Comments

Everyone will receive an additional participation grade for this assignment. You should read through everyone's proposals after they are uploaded and add constructive comments below the proposal on which you're commenting. Comments should be submitted by March 5 so you have time to incorporate them, if applicable, into your project outline. Please remember to sign your comments by adding four tildes (~~~~) to the end of your contribution. This will automatically add your username and the date/time of your post. If we don't know who you are we can't give you credit for finishing this assignment!

Jolietheone 16:15, 25 February 2014 (EST)

How do you propose to collect data to answer the last question? Ichua 15:22, 27 February 2014 (EST)


Hey Jolie! You picked a really fascinating topic to cover! Just a few thoughts I hope will help. How do you plan on pinpointing how all the users behave differently, just because there are so many registered accounts you might be able to find people who behave nearly the same or certain individuals who have accounts on both Instagram and Flickr. Just as a mere suggestion maybe you can find a niche that is unique to each site and compare them? Maybe Instagram has thousands of pictures of food and seflis while Flickr has more professional content? I hope this will help you! Emmanuelsurillo 15:15, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Drogowski 14:58, 25 February 2014 (EST)

How would this differ from other imaginary items of trade like currency/commodity derivatives and futures and virtual commodities like pork bellies? Ichua 15:17, 27 February 2014 (EST)

Dear Daniel, What an interesting topic! I was not even aware that state governments recognized these currencies. Would you be able to come up with more material if you focus on one or two countries and their reaction to the online currency? Also Ichua gave great advice; maybe one country’s reaction and policies to multiple online currencies would help in the scope of observation. Your idea of creating a website to report and share your findings is really novel! Emmanuelsurillo 15:26, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Marissa1989 23:37, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Hi, Marissa! I used AirBnB to rent out my apartment last summer and it actually resulted in me being robbed by the person to the tune of $10,000-- not including the rent for the summer, which he didn't pay (I didn't get any of it back, either, despite the insurance). It was a nasty situation. Anyways, from what I understand, the majority of communication on AirBnB is done privately. Without staging anything or intervening, how do you plan to observe enough to answer your question(s)? I think this is basically the same concern with one of the other treatments I read, regarding Facebook. I do think the security of platforms like AirBnB is of great concern and would be a very interesting subject to study in depth!Castille 21:16, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Dear Marissa, I loved the idea for your prospectus! Just as a suggestion, would you consider comparing a few corresponding sites like 9flats, Couchsurfing International, or Hospitality Club? You could analyze how they handle different verifiability and security issues while also comparing how the sites are constructed to better “vet” their users. This may yield insight on how trustworthy their users are to each other. You might even want to inquire if one has had “major” legal issues in the past. I hope this helps! Emmanuelsurillo 15:32, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Dear Melissa, What a great topic and area of coverage!!! I’m hoping my comments and questions will be of help to you! Which site succumbs more readily to outside pressure and take down requests? Also you mentioned that a susceptible compliant to both is that they are accused of not “vetting” their sources. You could possible test to see which one (if either of them do) checks them more thoroughly. This might be, and I know nothing about it, accomplished by putting posts of your own and noting if they require any amount of proof, citation, source, or quote of any kind. I really hope this helps you! Emmanuelsurillo 15:35, 1 March 2014 (EST)


Hey Mike, it would absolutely be my pleasure to provide feedback to you. I won't go too far before having the time to focus & read it completely- so my first feedback to you is: if you didn't pick such an interesting topic, I would have actually read the full prospectus. However after reading your first paragraph, I ended up watching TPP and reading its subreddit and forgot to finish reading your prospectus! hahaha. But this weekend I'll spend time focusing and try to provide you feedback, hopefully as good as the feedback you gave me (: Erin Saucke-Lacelle 10:34, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Dear Michael, I find your prospective very interesting! I thought to give you these few suggestions. I hope they will help! You might want to see what percentage of Flickr users are a part of the Creative Commons community and whether it consists of a majority or a minority. Another area of research might be into the other forms of control that Flickr uses to protect copyrighted material, and then to compare them with Creative Commons to see if they are as effective, prevalent, or well known. Also, when there are infringements in copyright policy, do people respond to correction or do they just ignore and continue violating the rules? Lastly, how does the Creative Commons community handle repeat violators (if there are any)? Wish you the best! Emmanuelsurillo 15:43, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Luciagamboaso 10:42, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Lucia, are there specified rules of engagement so that government effort to filter or modify inappropriate inputs are minimized? Ichua 13:32, 25 February 2014 (EST)
I'd really like to read and comment on your prospectus, but it seems like the file didn't upload. Happy to respond to it once it's up!
Jkelly 20:57, 26 February 2014 (EST)
  • Assignment 2:
  • Can websites with online forums, control the behavior of its members for the sake of growth?

Dancoron 09:47, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Hello, Dan! Admittedly, I had never heard of “Anandtech.com” prior to reading your prospectus, but I’m glad that you told me about it. I really like their “Cable TVification” assessment of the internet in recent years. After reading your prospectus it seems to me that you are focusing on Lessig’s norms as regulators within the site’s forums, as well as “laws" instituted by the website. It is an interesting subject, because as you say, this particular forum is very successful in fostering an environment where users are likely to return. That said, I see that you qualify users of the site as “good,” and I’m curious to know how you will operationalize this term for your project. You mention words like “courteous” and “helpful,” but I’m wondering: what characteristics do you think you will look for when observing, in order to qualify a “good user.” For comparison, do you have an example of what behavior that “bad” users might entail? Lastly, I see that there are literally millions of post on the forum; you may wish to focus on a specific topic and/or date range in order to have a more manageable data set to observe. I’m interested to see what you’re project will entail, especially being that I am also observing forums for my project. Vance.puchalski 23:00, 1 March 2014 (EST)
  • Assignment Two:
  • A Web of Lies and Licentious Lure: Temptation, Divorce, and the Internet

--AmyAnn0644 17:24, 24 February 2014 (EST)

First of all, GREAT TITLE!!! Second of all, this seems like an extremely interesting subject and I'd love to read more about it. I do wonder whether you'll be able to get access to the material you might be looking for by doing "undercover investigation" and the other research methods you listed. It seems to me that the kind of exchanges you're discussing would be difficult to observe on Facebook as they likely wouldn't be out in the open. I may be completely mistaken, but I was also under the impression that the assignment encouraged examining a more open forum or something of the like where observation was more feasible. I know that there are public matchmaking sites and I would assume there are also forums geared towards those who wish to have illicit affairs, so that might be an area into which you may want to delve. Castille 02:19, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Margorm 18:30, 23 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Margo, I'm not sure if you'll ever read this, but if you do, would you by any chance be interested in working on your project in a group? I'm highly interested in this topic (in part because I'm considering founding my next startup in this field), and I've been following it both from a distance as an observer, and from the inside as a customer of 23andMe. I'd love to dig deeper and work with you on this project. Cheers, Philip Seyfi --Seifip 19:28, 24 February 2014 (EST)
For Assignment 2-b, I would love to comment on this prospectus! Very interesting topic, excellent questions and the FDA is the US gov't organization with which I am most familiar. I will begin now, but please don't take my comments as complete until deadline of Assm't 2-b.
  • I'm not sure what this sentence means (and would like to know, in order to be sure I am understanding current situation of 23andme: December 5, 2013, 23andMe resumed selling its genetic data only related to ancestry-related results
  • It is very cool that you are taking an empirical approach to the community discussion, and I will have to read your prospectus again later to refine this comment, but I want to be confident that the data you collect will contribute to answering your question, which I believe to be "Is the FDA indeed fit to regulate genomic tests/databases".
Erin Saucke-Lacelle 12:07, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Castille 18:58, 22 February 2014 (EST)

Castille, I think you have a really excellent topic here. My first thought is that it would probably be helpful to choose a particular self-harming behavior that's discussed on Tumblr to help narrow the scope of your work. Additionally, while these issues can and often are related, I imagine that the Tumblr communities that surround each issue probably have a distinct culture. This topic makes me think of the Jessica McKenzie piece, "Obeying French Courts, Twitter Hands Over Identities of Users Who Employed Anti-Semitic Hashtag" we read in week four. I would be curious to know how many of the controversial hashtags are actually used in subversive ways. Some of the reactions to Tumblr's policy change seem to touch on this when users write that they use these tags to address their own struggle with self-harming behavior. After these policy changes got some press, did it shed enough light on these self-harm blogs to inspire users to use these potentially triggering hashtags in new and positive ways?
Jkelly 13:56, 26 February 2014 (EST)
Thanks for your feedback! I'm planning to narrow the scope to primarily center on pro-suicide blog postings, but I think I'll have to use some other examples such as cutting and possibly even pro-eating disorder blogs, as they all seem to interact with each other. It appears from my research thus far that the communities are intrinsically linked much more so than I expected. I agree, it would be interesting to see if things have changed-- though I'm not quite sure how to gauge pre-policy versus post-policy changes. If you have any ideas, I'd love to hear them! Castille 02:19, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Watson 23:33, 23 February 2014 (EST)


Lrsanchez 21:42, 24 February 2014 (EST)

Laura – Instagram is not only the biggest mobile photo sharing app, but is also now owned by Facebook, and thus a disproportionate amount of mobile peer to peer communication falls to the censorship whims of this company. This is an incredibly worthy area to research, if not lofty. Since Instagram now allows direct, private communication of photos, you have to wonder if there is a difference in how moderated these communications are versus a post intended for the public that uses hashtags (let us not forget that the hashtag’s original use was searchability, not irony). That said it might be very difficult monitor the differences in speed and effectiveness of what gets censored without interfering with the community you’re observing. One way may be to follow news events (such as this recent one: http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=9448993) that show Instagram’s policy enforcement in action. The issue with that approach is that it is cherry picking the successful takedowns rather than observing uncensored posts that are breaking the terms of service. Another option may be monitoring Instagram’s list of banned hashtags and searching synonyms or alternate hashtags, but again this is a difficult aspect of their policy to observe in action.
I believe there is still strategizing to be done to design your observation of the community, above merely reporting their policy. I hope my take somehow helps you with this endeavor!
MikeJohnson 09:55, 1 March 2014 (EST)
Hi, Laura! I think Instagram is a really great topic and will provide a massive amount of material, which I think can be beneficial and detrimental. It seems you might want to consider focusing on a specific aspect of censorship on Instagram, like nudity, drug references, or profanity (if any of those are prohibited-- I don't know their specific terms of use). What aspect of Instagram's censorship do you find to have the highest potential to become problematic? Is their choice as a company to disallow certain messages/images actually infringing on free speech, when they don't have any power over whether an individual chooses to express himself (IE he/she is still capable of posting the material on another site), they merely control/monitor the postings on their own site? Castille 02:19, 28 February 2014 (EST)
  • Jradoff 21:56, 24 February 2014 (EST)
  • Comparing Regulation of Free Expression in Online Game Forums
  • Prospectus Text

Jkelly 22:15, 24 February 2014 (EST)

Jane – It is a great idea to compare feminist discussion within the confines of a feminist-oriented website to discussion in a public space without this slant. The regulations on discussion are obviously going to be wildly different in each of these communities. You identify Facebook and Twitter as less thoughtful in their discussion for feminist topics - perhaps as a result of their differences in comment policy? I was interested in the comment policy of Bitch Media that you mentioned in the prospectus, so I looked it up. (For others: it can be found here: http://bitchmagazine.org/comments-policy) One line that stood out to me was the following: “As far as moderation of this space goes, guest bloggers moderate the comments on their respective posts, but website moderators will step in when necessary.” – Does this mean that each blog post is technically regulated in a different way? It is not a deal killer if so, because it sparked the following idea: Because FB and Twitter are big places, could you find a smaller community (that is not inherently feminist-oriented) that is discussing the same thing as mentioned in one or a few of the Bitch Media posts, and compare the discussions directly? Just a thought!
MikeJohnson 11:54, 26 February 2014 (EST)


Does anyone else see the awesome irony of a woman named Jane writing about Bitch magazine? Am I the only one on here who was a teenage girl in the '90s? I remember clear as day, reading Bitch's criticisms of Jane back in 1998. BTW Jkelly I hope you understand that as a very longtime fan of Bitch magazine I am in no way criticizing your project, I actually think it's such a cool topic. You & I would probably have been awesome friends as teenagers. p.s. This doesn't count as a comment on the prospectus!!! I hope. Erin Saucke-Lacelle 21:44, 26 February 2014 (EST)
Haha, thanks so much for sharing that Erin!! I haven't had a chance to read the whole thing, but when you see words and phrases like "fake, sanctimonious," "self-obsessed," "narcissism," "blithe unconcern with which they suggest spending huge amounts of money on items of debatable utility," and "overweening focus on the superficial, ersatz do-it-for-you tone, and fake individualism" in just a quick scan of the article, it's bound to be a fun read. Thanks! Jkelly 08:53, 27 February 2014 (EST)


Erin Saucke-Lacelle 23:33, 24 February 2014 (EST)

Hi Erin, I agree with your hypothesis about alienation. For example the weak and poor citizens do not have access to the internet and will be left out of the discussion. Their needs are often under-represented or not represented at all. Ichua 08:04, 25 February 2014 (EST)
Thank you for the feedback Ichua! Your comment makes me wonder though- for this project, we are assigned to studying an online community. Wouldn't the nature of the assignment therefore assume that all students completing this assignment will be leaving out the interest and opinions of people who do not have access to the Internet? Also, I am curious what you mean when you refer to 'weak' citizens? Again, thanks so much for the feedback! Erin Saucke-Lacelle 11:47, 25 February 2014 (EST)
"Weak" = "Not powerful", have no voice or influence in government discussions and policy-making. Some politicians even believe these people should not participate in voting. Typically viewed as a country's liability rather than an asset. In a country like the Philippines with a total population of 90 million, a great economic revolution can happen if the 40 million in poverty and unemployed are mobilized. Ichua 13:49, 25 February 2014 (EST)
Erin - I think the comparison of two subreddits with different regulations is a solid method of studying the effect of regulation on political discussion. I also believe the two subreddits you have chosen make for a great comparison. The only reservation I have in your prospectus is the focus on word count of the regulations as indicative of the rigor of the moderation. For example, one subreddit may simply say "Discussion of Russia is forbidden" - which in five words hampers more conversation than either of the two sets of regulations do in actuality. I do not think the word count is a meaningful statistic. Apropos your question of whether those without internet access will be under-represented in our studies, I would say that because we are focusing on specific small communities to begin with, we are under-representing the reactions (to control) of everyone in the world who is not in that community. The vast majority of the world is not included. Our focus is on only those within the community itself that we can observe. Ultimately I believe your project is designed very well. Since I too am studying a subreddit for my project, I will be following your progress closely!
MikeJohnson 11:23, 26 February 2014 (EST)
Hi MikeJohnson! Thank you very much for the feedback, very good point about the empirical data on the rules, hopefully I can expand when I have 2500 words to work with. BTW, I just wanted to comment- the question about people without Internet access was actually Ichua's question. My understanding of the assignment is to study only online communities for this assignment (and not offline humans, which excludes anyone who doesn't or can't access the Internets). My question that Ichua commented on is whether "users are intimidated by the effort or research required to post, thus limiting participation to a narrow audience". Sidenote- Thank you very much for introducing us to the Twitch Plays Pokémon phenomenon in class. So freaking cool. My God do I ever love the Internet.-Erin Saucke-Lacelle
Thanks Erin! I think it is absolutely amazing as well, and I've never played Pokémon. If you would like to read my prospectus and help me think about potential research questions using their subreddit, I am all ears. MikeJohnson 11:34, 27 February 2014 (EST)


Ichua 06:31, 25 February 2014 (EST)

I learned from Erin that a project of this nature has its limitations. Government leaders or concerned individuals need to go to Ground Zero and observe for themselves the problems of the poor and weak citizenry. And if democratic rule has failed to eliminate poverty, why not consider compassionate rule?
@Ichua you know, I might be wrong!!! Not sure yet, I guess, til we hear back from more students, or the prof/TAs (: Erin Saucke-Lacelle 15:40, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Psl 11:57, 25 February 2014 (EST)

For Assignment 2-b, I would love to comment on this prospectus- I will begin now, but please don't take my comments as complete until deadline of Assm't 2-b.
Not sure if this will count for feedback for assignment 2-b, but I thought I might share. After reading about how exclusive PubMed Commons is, of course I really wanted to join. As an author of a PubMed article, I should theoretically have access, if I understand the rules correctly. However PubMed doesn't have my current email address on file (and I can't guess which former email they would have). I think this might be an ineffective means of control, as only 1 in 6 authors on my publication have submitted their email addresses when submitting the article- the rest of us just signed a waiver allowing publication. I sent a request to HelpDesk, and will let you know what they say... (: BTW, for what it's worth, I think you did a very good job at following assignment guidelines. Erin Saucke-Lacelle 13:38, 25 February 2014 (EST)

VACYBER 12:46, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Twood 14:03, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Somehow the uploaded RTF file had been converted to a CALC spreadsheet file, making some of the contents hard to read. Ichua 15:08, 27 February 2014 (EST)


Hi Twood. I find your paper topic to be incredibly interesting and well-thought out. I wish I had constructive criticism to give you, but I find that you are on the right path. My only question at the moment: how do you plan on measuring the response of community members to the each sites' control mechanisms? Lrsanchez 11:41, 28 February 2014 (EST)

cheikhmbacke 15:15, 25 February 2014 (EST)






You raise some great ideas in your prospectus that would make for an interesting research paper around Etsy. However, I wonder if it might be best to focus more on the controls for which you can already observe playing out within the Etsy community's online activities? In other words, the community norms and architecture controls within Etsy itself (user-"self-regulation" and Etsy's-"private-regulation") might be the most reliable "observable data" that you will be able to anticipate over the next few weeks. The government level controls (public-regulation) you suggest may require moving outside this community, and I am not sure that a useful discussion (with observational data) will be possible within the page limit, nor would it be crucial to answering your research question.
I like the research question very much, and I think it couches the challenges you hope to observe within the methodology you propose. Also, I anticipate that the community interactions over the next couple of months should provide you with enough observational data to answer your question. One more tip on the question... What would you think about starting the question with "How" rather than "Do"...? Play around with the phrase of your question, and see how it feels. My thinking is that you will allow yourself some flexibility in what you will truly have to report on when it comes time to write up the results. The answer to a "Do" question requires one to choose a yes or no and your findings will likely challenge any "absolute" judgment call... So don't let yourself get cornered into having to make that choice (at least not at this early stage). By starting the question with "How do Etsy’s regulations...", will allow you to have more flexibility to report on what the observations will show, and your can balance your discussion section on some good and not-so-good controls that play out over the next few weeks.
Last point. In your sentence "I intend to identify how Etsy controls, or fails to control content in a manner that is advantageous to their users.", I wasn't sure if by "users" you meant the buyers, sellers, or both. My mind is interpreting that "user" is the buyer in this sentence’s context, and the word "content" is used to define both the items and community sellers that are being controlled. True? That distinction may be important to clarify as the full report gets written, because the Etsy controls and observations being gathered will (I suspect) impact buyers vs sellers vs content each a little differently. On a similar note... To cut down on the need to follow every buyer, seller and thing in "Top Searches" for this community, do you think it would be helpful to focus on just one type of craft? I don't know enough about Etsy specifically to determine if that would work for this project, but it might be another way to find a sub-group/sub-community limit, and still provide you with enough observational data to draw some conclusions.
Hoping these comments are helpful! Psl 12:22, 28 February 2014 (EST)


Title: YouTube Comment Filtering and Other Cyberbullying Initiatives

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2015/File:Lpereira_Prospectus.docx

Lpereira 16:07, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Might be interesting to determine whether and how Youtube encourages positive comments and discourage negative or hate comments. Ultimately, it would be ideal if the character of misbehaving individuals could be improved. Some ideas might be the use of "Like" and "Dislike" votes on these comments and/or the award/deduction of "attitude points". The individuals posting hate and aggressive comments could be prohibited from further postings if the attitude point reaches a certain limit. Ichua 15:02, 27 February 2014 (EST)


I really like the focal point you will be observing, and you are quite right in pointing out that this "negativity" is becoming an unfortunate reality for many "open comment" sections within these online spaces. Even what can begin as constructive dialog and healthy debate, can quickly degenerate into blather, flames, and hate words when anonymity can be so effectively used as a shield. Interestingly, we can't always point our finger at just one "troll" injecting some deliberate provocation...because sometimes the breakdown occurs with the 3 or 4 community members who (hither to) we're exchanging words in a perfectly eloquent & respectful manner. But the hate, racism, and bullying that poison the dialog on these comment-boards are on a much more disturbing level, and one that certainly will make for an interesting study.
So, The broad question that I am hearing in your prospectus is "What are the most important controls that an online service provider can successfully implement to intercept and discourage cyberbullying, hate-speech, and irrelevant negativity? The sub-question then would be "How effective and/or constraining are those controls on the community's ability to engage with each other in a meaningful unbiased dialog about the content? (YouTube in this example)?
Have you given some thought to the subject matter that you will focus on, as a way to observe how these comments progress? It may be helpful to put your lens onto a consistent subject to observe the cycle of communication. From there you should be able to witness what prompts the conversation to begin in the first place; when do counter-points get introduced, how long is constructive dialog able to bridge back and fourth, what is the "poison-pill" that kills the conversation, and when do the controls kick-in?. (Observing where the controls kick in would obviously be the essential part to report on, not so much each of those elements of the cycle of communication I itemized there.)
I’d be curious to also know if the observation shows that the cycle of communication is more (or less) positive throughout based on the type of subject that initiates the conversation? News stories on "hot button" topics or baseball contrasted with (say) a page dealing with baking fudge probably have different trajectories of "success" in remaining positive. (I am thinking about the inherent behavior of the potential community members themselves… one lends itself to polarized opinions with predictable “zealots” appearing in either camp, while the other community may be more welcoming of differing opinions and tastes). SO for example, thinking of an individual wearing that New York Yankees hat in Fenway Park on game day....vs... a group of bakers talking about chocolate vs. peanut butter fudge recipes…The former is likely to risk some taunting, a black eye, a broken tooth, and perhaps a small riot... while those in the latter group, might, at worst, receive only a cavity. Anyway, my point is that it might be interesting compare a couple of focused topics of conversation as a way of discovering a smaller sub-community that builds around a YouTube comment-board (With one engaging in a "Hot button" topic.... While the other group is discussing something seemingly non-polarizing.)Psl 12:00, 28 February 2014 (EST)

Benh 16:49, 25 February 2014 (EST)


Hi Ben. While I think your prospectus brings up the interesting and very pertinent topic of government control, surveillance, and censorship, I think that it is simply far too broad of a topic. For the assignment, we are supposed to monitor the activities of users on a particular site or group of sites, but looking at the internet as a whole is far too much for an 8-10 page paper! Perhaps consider government control, surveillance, and censorship while observing a particular website that has been named as a victim (by the media) of NSA's surveillance and dig deeper there. Lrsanchez 13:02, 28 February 2014 (EST)


TriciaBy 16:59, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Patricia, First off, love your idea, moderating internet speech, as well as your methodology: if what you want to measure is moderating behavior, norms, and free speech concerns, the “Politics & Leaders” forum is a fantastic place to do so since It appears that discussions there can turn from heated to vituperative in the blink of an eye! With respect to your research question, by specifying “effective,” I assume that you will quantify instances of behavior that violate the established rules of the site. This method is good since you give yourself a verifiable and quantifiable measure. You can then use Lessig’s and other scholars work to explain these data. Now, you say that you wish to "research the rules and regulations of the site,” which looks like it might be an insurmountable task. I visited the site’s “Super Editor handbook” and I see that it is quite extensive. Perhaps you might want to focus specifically on one type of violation, such as "3.4.1 Discouraged Ranking Themes - Personal Experience / Personal Preference Rankings” ? Vance.puchalski 23:00, 1 March 2014 (EST)

Vance.puchalski 17:17, 25 February 2014 (EST)

A. Tom Anteus 17:26, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Julie 18:37, 25 February 2014 (EST)

Andrew Grant


Andrew, your prospectus sounds fantastic. Lots of interesting questions being asked in light of Lessig's Four Forces and the Quantified Self movement. I think that you many be asking too many questions for an 8-10 page paper, if you are to go into sufficient depth for each one. Do you think that it's realistic to answer the five research questions in so short of a paper? Other than that, I think you are off to a great start and I am interested in hearing more about it. Lrsanchez 11:49, 28 February 2014 (EST)

In general, it might be helpful to state why your project is important and how the outcome of the research might help regulate/control or improve human behavior on the internet. Ichua 19:58, 27 February 2014 (EST)

Retrieved from "http://cyber.harvard.edu/is2015/?title=Assignment_2_Submissions&oldid=1199"