hallo Altrea,
vorweg vielen Dank für die Rückmeldung!!!
Wie gesagt, es tut mir nicht weh. Wird ja keiner gezwungen sich einen Beitrag durchzulesen. Ich stelle halt nur das generelle Interesse in Frage, aber da musst du dann für dich selbst entscheiden, inwiefern du die Zeit zum Schreiben eines Beitrags investieren möchtest.
.. wie bereits gesagt: das Schreiben - das mach ich gern… und ich hab meine Motivation ja schon in Kürze angedeutet - im Grunde ist sie ja weder orginell, noch besonders noch sonst was - im Sinne eines weiteren OpenSource-Begriffs wohl auch ziemlich gewöhnlich und schlicht.
mehr hier etwa: Who is spreading the word? The influence of extraversion and openness on consumer passion and evangelism
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... evangelismund noch mehr etwa auch hier: https://mediarep.org/bitstream/handle/d ... sAllowed=ybtw: hatten wir im Ansatz die Diskussion auch hier schon - zuimdest gestreift:
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=78904und jetzt eine
Zwischenfrage: - wir - also du Altrea u. ich wir sind bzgl. Motivation nicht weit auseinander - du bist weit über 10 Jahre schon hier - und mit weit über 10 TSD Postings (ehrenamtl. nehm ich mal an) hier unterwegs mit einer erheblichen Motivation, einem erheblichem Aufwand an Zeit und und und. Das verbindet mich mit dir! Dass - dass ich hier nicht die Kernguppe von WP-User treffe - das ist mal so - das gramt mich nicht... Das hat Neus schon vor 19 Jahren gesagt - ist wurscht - denn wir haben es mit einer vanishing cost of communication zu tun...
https://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/neus.pdfProblem Outline: The vanishing cost of communication Before the proliferation of the Internet technology, there was a simple filtering system that kept the quality and relevance of transmitted information mostly above a certain threshold. It was called cost. Because every copy of information and every movement of that copy was tied to physical matter, it always incurred real cost that someone had to shoulder. Therefore, only such information which was deemed by someone to be worth spending money on copying and distributing, had a fighting chance of ever being seen by more than a trivial number of people. Yes, there have always been tabloids whose information quality, when measured against objective criteria, did not do terribly well, but in terms of a fitness for use definition, this content still had to have a certain “quality”, because people actually paid to read it. And while there have always been “nut cases” creating their own newspaper from their flat on a copying machine, your chances of ever coming across that content fell dramatically (probably to the tune of N2) with your physical or social distance from the source. So traditionally, a piece of information had to pass through several layers of weeding, selecting and editing before it would get a fighting chance to come to the attention of a wider audience. Publishers and advertisers were effectively making a bet, with their very real money, on the quality (again in terms of fitness for use) of the content being suitable for its intended recipients, because every copy of information incurred real costs. Therefore, it used to be good business to limit the proliferation of your information to coincide with your intendet audience, i.e. the target segment or market. And the better you were at addressing only your target segment with the information (and in turn designing the information to be relevant to the recipients) the less money you wasted. This incentive brought about editors, proofreaders, market analysts, etc. The Internet, however, dramatically lowered the cost of copying and distribution – to practically zero. The last time such a major drop in the cost of information proliferation occurred was probably IQ 2001: The 6th International Conference on Information Quality at MIT 3 Gutenberg’s invention of movable type5 . As with Gutenberg’s invention, this more recent drop in the economic cost of distributing information has created major shockwaves around the world. The success of the Internet as the undisputed global communications medium of the future and the rise (and often fall) of countless businesses built around it are an example of this kind of shockwave
zur
Motivation auch (noch) grundsätzlicher hier: - mythical man month : Vom Mythos des Mann-Monats: Essays über Software-Engineering (The My-- thical Man-Month) Buch von Frederick P. Brooks
und was Brooks hier nur anreisst, kann die Open-Source-Forschung vertiefen:
Ergo hier also weiterführend und darüber hinaus: Ein Seitenblick in die Open-Source-Forschung lohnt sich hier .:ich schicke es aber vorweg - musst schon etwas Zeit mitbringen.
sic:
https://flosshub.org/biblio - die allereinfachsten Texte - z.B. jene von
- Andrea Hemetsberger
- van Hippel
- David Souza et al
- Andreas Neus
- und die vielen hundert anderen tollen und lesenswerten Autoren die der globalen OpenSource-Community seit 30 Jahren über die Schulter guckt und sieht was diese Welt im Kern zusammenhält, ausmacht u.sw. usf.
Managing Information Quality in Virtual Communities of PracticeAndreas Neus: in this paper we review how the new economics of information enable a new paradigm of collaboration. Spearheaded by the Open Source community, this evolutionary approach to collaborative content creation is a way to address information quality in virtual communities of practice. Based on experience gained in community projects, a few simple steps toward improving the quality of information in virtual communities are presented and illustrated.
Seeking the Source: Software Source Code as a Social and Technical Artifact David De Souza, C, Froehlich, J, Dourish, Pcf
https://flosshub.org/232in distributed software development, two sorts of dependencies can arise. The structure of the software system itself can create dependencies between software elements, while the structure of the development process can create dependencies between software developers. Each of these both shapes and reflects the development process. Our research concerns the extent to which, by looking uniformly at artifacts and activities, we can uncover the structures of software projects, and the ways in which development processes are inscribed into software artifacts. We show how a range of organizational processes and arrangements can be uncovered in software repositories, with implications for collaborative work in large distributed groups such as open source communities.
From a Firm-Based to a Community-Based Model of Knowledge Creation: The Case of the Linux Kernel Development We propose a new model of knowledge creation in purposeful, loosely coordinated, distributed systems, as an alternative to a firm-based one. Specifically, using the case of the Linux kernel development project, we build a model of community-based, evolutionary knowledge creation to study how thousands of talented volunteers, dispersed across organizational and geographical boundaries, collaborate via the Internet to produce a knowledge-intensive, innovative product of high quality. By comparing and contrasting the Linux model with the traditional/commercial model of software development and firm-based knowledge creation efforts, we show how the proposed model of knowledge creation expands beyond the boundary of the firm. Our model suggests that the product development process can be effectively organized as an evolutionary process of learning driven by criticism and error correction. We conclude by offering some theoretical implications of our community-based model of knowledge creation for the literature of organizational learning, community life, and the uses of knowledge in society.
"we study the Linux development community mainly by analyzing the artifacts that the Linux developers have produced. A key output of knowledge creation activities is the artifacts. The most important artifact, of course, is the Linux operating system source code." "Along with the source code, a "Credits" text file and a "MAINTAINERS" text file are distributed to the users." "An equally important artifact is the development activities archived in the Linux-kernel mailing list"..."Using the weekly Linux-kernel email archive for years 1995 to 2000 as a key source of data, we focus on people who have sent at least one email to the Linux-kernel mailing list. ""In addition, we examine the developers' demographic distributions, working patterns, and motivations by analyzing the raw data from an on-line survey"
Hemetsberger, Andrea (2006), "Understanding Consumers' Collective Action on the Internet: A Conceptualization and Empirical Investigation of the Free- and Open-Source Movement," Research Synopsis, Cumulative Habilitation at the University of Innsbruck, April, 2006, 66 pages. pdf
https://www.hemetsberger.cc/publication ... tation.pdfund wenns mal regnen sollte am Wochenende - mehr hier
sic:
https://flosshub.org/biblio [ huhhh grad festgestellt - sind schon 1750 records drinne ]
Dir Altrea - vielen Dank für den guten Austausch!!
vg leash