Distributed moderation systems:an exploration of their utility and the social implications of their widespread adoption.

The present research introduces and investigates Distributed Moderation systems - in particular, sites where the votes of users are aggregated in order to rank or grade items of content. The primary subject of this research is reddit.com - a 'social news' website where users vote to collectively determine the level of visibility which will be afforded to submitted items of content. This research is investigative in nature - at its inception there was little published research on Distributed Moderation (DM) systems. The question which has guided the research is "what can we learn about these systems through observation and the interrogation of data which they naturally produce and store in their day-to-day operation?". There are Chapters of the thesis which investigate how DM works in practice (Chapter 5) and how/why individual users participate (Chapter 6). The research also devotes considerable attention to the social implications of producing information resources in this fashion (Chapter 7) - how do the resources which are produced using DM systems differ to those produced in a more conventional manner? At the outset of this research reddit was a relatively little-known website - over the course of the research it has become much more widely recognised and in the process it has changed considerably. Chapter 8 considers reddit from a longitudinal perspective; observing its development has offered insight into both the potential and the limitations of this particular application of DM. The final Chapter re-visits research questions and considers how one might go about adapting DM to other domains, with an emphasis on the political.

[1]  Christopher M. Hoadley,et al.  Anonymity options and professional participation in an online community of practice , 2005, CSCL.

[2]  D. Murthy Digital Ethnography , 2008 .

[3]  E. Noam The Internet: Still Wide Open and Competitive? , 2003 .

[4]  Richard L. Trueswell Some Behavioral Patterns of Library Users: The 80/20 Rule. , 1969 .

[5]  Tad Hogg,et al.  Diversity of User Activity and Content Quality in Online Communities , 2009, ICWSM.

[6]  Fang Wu,et al.  Feedback Loops of Attention in Peer Production , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering.

[7]  Brian J. Taylor,et al.  Causal discovery in social media using quasi-experimental designs , 2010, SOMA '10.

[8]  Ravi Kumar,et al.  On the Bursty Evolution of Blogspace , 2003, WWW '03.

[9]  A. Chadwick The Political Information Cycle in a Hybrid News System: The British Prime Minister and the “Bullygate” Affair , 2011 .

[10]  Michael Mitzenmacher,et al.  A Brief History of Generative Models for Power Law and Lognormal Distributions , 2004, Internet Math..

[11]  Scott Wright,et al.  Democracy, deliberation and design: the case of online discussion forums , 2007, New Media Soc..

[12]  S. Coleman,et al.  Bowling Together: Online Public Engagement in Policy Deliberation , 2001 .

[13]  Jahna Otterbacher,et al.  Helpful to you is useful to me: The use and interpretation of social voting , 2011, ASIST.

[14]  Alexander Halavais A GENEALOGY OF BADGES , 2012 .

[15]  Sergey Brin,et al.  The Anatomy of a Large-Scale Hypertextual Web Search Engine , 1998, Comput. Networks.

[16]  Sandra González-Bailón,et al.  Opening the black box of link formation: Social factors underlying the structure of the web , 2009, Soc. Networks.

[17]  Yochai Benkler,et al.  Coase's Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the Firm , 2001, ArXiv.

[18]  Tim O'Reilly,et al.  What is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software , 2007 .

[19]  Daniel Kreiss,et al.  The limits of peer production: Some reminders from Max Weber for the network society , 2011, New Media Soc..

[20]  Scott Wright,et al.  Politics as usual? Revolution, normalization and a new agenda for online deliberation , 2012, New Media Soc..

[21]  M. Castells The rise of the network society , 1996 .

[22]  R. Kelly Garrett,et al.  It's All News to Me: The Effect of Instruments on Ratings Provision , 2007, 2007 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'07).

[23]  Tad Hogg,et al.  Using a model of social dynamics to predict popularity of news , 2010, WWW '10.

[24]  S. Wright Government-run Online Discussion Fora: Moderation, Censorship and the Shadow of Control1 , 2006 .

[25]  Todd Graham,et al.  Discursive Equality and Everyday Talk Online: The Impact of "Superparticipants" , 2014, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[26]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  Follow the (slash) dot: effects of feedback on new members in an online community , 2005, GROUP.

[27]  Kwan Yi,et al.  Harnessing collective intelligence in social tagging using Delicious , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[28]  Tarald O. Kvålseth,et al.  Note on Cohen's Kappa , 1989 .

[29]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Knowledge sharing and yahoo answers: everyone knows something , 2008, WWW.

[30]  Ravi Kumar,et al.  Trawling the Web for Emerging Cyber-Communities , 1999, Comput. Networks.

[31]  Yochai Benkler,et al.  The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom , 2006 .

[32]  HenzingerMonika,et al.  Analysis of a very large web search engine query log , 1999 .

[33]  D. Myers,et al.  The group polarization phenomenon. , 1976 .

[34]  David Woodward,et al.  The printing press as an agent of change , 1980 .

[35]  D. Hindman The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier , 1996 .

[36]  J. R. Koehler,et al.  Modern Applied Statistics with S-Plus. , 1996 .

[37]  Martin H. Levinson Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other , 2011 .

[38]  Paul Resnick,et al.  Slash(dot) and burn: distributed moderation in a large online conversation space , 2004, CHI.

[39]  C. Calhoun Community without Propinquity Revisited: Communications Technology and the Transformation of the Urban Public Sphere , 1998 .

[40]  V. Paxson,et al.  WHERE MATHEMATICS MEETS THE INTERNET , 1998 .

[41]  Dennis M. Wilkinson,et al.  Strong regularities in online peer production , 2008, EC '08.

[42]  Michel L. Goldstein,et al.  Problems with fitting to the power-law distribution , 2004, cond-mat/0402322.

[43]  C. A. Beard,et al.  Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. , 1917 .

[44]  Albert,et al.  Emergence of scaling in random networks , 1999, Science.

[45]  R. Collins The Credential Society: An Historical Sociology of Education and Stratification , 1979 .

[46]  Alexander Halavais,et al.  DO DUGG DIGGERS DIGG DILIGENTLY? , 2009 .

[47]  A. Bolaji Akinyemi,et al.  The social implications , 1971 .

[48]  Kevin Wise,et al.  Moderation, Response Rate, and Message Interactivity: Features of Online Communities and Their Effects on Intent to Participate , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[49]  Antonio Gulli,et al.  The indexable web is more than 11.5 billion pages , 2005, WWW '05.

[50]  G. Yule,et al.  Some Statistics of Evolution and Geographical Distribution in Plants and Animals, and their Significance. , 1922, Nature.

[51]  F. Maxwell Harper,et al.  Facts or friends?: distinguishing informational and conversational questions in social Q&A sites , 2009, CHI.

[52]  Hosung Park,et al.  What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? , 2010, WWW '10.

[53]  Sanghee Oh,et al.  Users' relevance criteria for evaluating answers in a social Q&A site , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[54]  Guido Hertel,et al.  Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel , 2003 .

[55]  E. B. Wilson Probable Inference, the Law of Succession, and Statistical Inference , 1927 .

[56]  Noam Chomsky,et al.  Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media , 1988 .

[57]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  Dynamics of collaborative document rating systems , 2007, WebKDD/SNA-KDD '07.

[58]  Andrei Z. Broder,et al.  Graph structure in the Web , 2000, Comput. Networks.

[59]  N. Anstead,et al.  The Emerging Viewertariat and BBC Question Time , 2011 .

[60]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Internet: Diameter of the World-Wide Web , 1999, Nature.

[61]  Fang Wu,et al.  Crowdsourcing, attention and productivity , 2008, J. Inf. Sci..

[62]  K. Mattson Creating a Democratic Public: The Struggle for Urban Participatory Democracy During the Progressive Era , 1997 .

[63]  J. McGonigal Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World , 2011 .

[64]  José van Dijck,et al.  Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated content , 2009 .

[65]  Michael Margolis,et al.  Politics as Usual: The Cyberspace `Revolution′ , 2000 .

[66]  Andrew J. Flanagin,et al.  Collective Action in Organizations: Interaction and Engagement in an Era of Technological Change , 2012 .

[67]  Mark J. Weal,et al.  An analysis of Social News Websites , 2011 .

[68]  A. Zeileis,et al.  Regression Models for Count Data in R , 2008 .

[69]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[70]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Scale-free characteristics of random networks: the topology of the world-wide web , 2000 .

[71]  Scott Wright,et al.  A virtual European public sphere? The Futurum discussion forum , 2007 .

[72]  Tad Hogg,et al.  Stochastic Models of User-Contributory Web Sites , 2009, ICWSM.

[73]  C. Firestone,et al.  Elections in cyberspace : toward a new era in American politics , 1996 .

[74]  Elinor Ostrom,et al.  Ideas, Artifacts, and Facilities: Information as a Common-Pool Resource , 2003 .

[75]  Howard Rheingold,et al.  Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution , 2002 .

[76]  Alcides Velasquez,et al.  Motivations to participate in online communities , 2010, CHI.

[77]  J. Suler The Online Disinhibition Effect , 2004, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking.

[78]  A. Awan Virtual jihadist media , 2007 .

[79]  E. Hargittai Weaving the Western Web: explaining differences in Internet connectivity among OECD countries , 1999 .

[80]  Stephanie Forrest,et al.  Email networks and the spread of computer viruses. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[81]  B. Gutenberg,et al.  Frequency of Earthquakes in California , 1944, Nature.

[82]  Aniket Kittur,et al.  Harnessing the wisdom of crowds in wikipedia: quality through coordination , 2008, CSCW.

[83]  Matthew J. Salganik,et al.  Web-Based Experiments for the Study of Collective Social Dynamics in Cultural Markets , 2009, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[84]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  The ties that bind: Social network principles in online communities , 2009, Decis. Support Syst..

[85]  Ayse Onculer,et al.  Status as a Valued Resource , 2001 .

[86]  J. Habermas The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere , 1962 .

[87]  Greg Elmer,et al.  Live research: Twittering an election debate , 2013, New Media Soc..

[88]  E. Lu,et al.  Avalanches and the Distribution of Solar Flares , 1991 .

[89]  Kristina Lerman,et al.  Analysis of social voting patterns on digg , 2008, WOSN '08.

[90]  H Scottgordon The economic theory of a common-property resource: The fishery , 1991 .

[91]  Thomas E. Ruggiero Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century , 2000 .

[92]  Christian Bauckhage,et al.  The slashdot zoo: mining a social network with negative edges , 2009, WWW.

[93]  B. Yandell,et al.  Semi-Parametric Generalized Linear Models. , 1985 .

[94]  Sean A. Munson,et al.  Presenting diverse political opinions: how and how much , 2010, CHI.

[95]  Nathaniel Poor,et al.  Mechanisms of an Online Public Sphere: The Website Slashdot , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[96]  Carmen Stavrositu,et al.  The MoveOn Effect: The Unexpected Transformation of American Political Advocacy , 2012 .

[97]  J. Bohman Expanding Dialogue: The Internet, the Public Sphere and Prospects for Transnational Democracy , 2004 .

[98]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  Internet: Growth dynamics of the World-Wide Web , 1999, Nature.

[99]  Laura Miller e-Petitions at Westminster: the Way Forward for Democracy? , 2008 .