Community Dialogue on The Role of Community Governance

Join the Community Data Science Collective (CDSC) for our 11th Science of Community Dialogue! This Community Dialogue will take place on April 4th at 12:00 pm CT. This Dialogue focuses on resisting online information manipulation and the role of community governance. Professor Paul Gowder (Northwestern University) will join Zarine Kharazian (University of Washington) to present recent research on topics including:

  • Exploring threats like misinformation and propaganda in online communities.
  • Limitations of approaches that neglect community governance.
  • Tradeoffs in governance models, such as those of Facebook, Bluesky, and Wikipedia.
  • Strategies to protect information commons.
  • Participatory governance for platforms.
  • Insights on democratizing platforms and society.

A full session descriptions is on our website. Register online.

What is a Dialogue?

The Science of Community Dialogue Series is a series of conversations between researchers, experts, community organizers, and other people who are interested in how communities work, collaborate, and succeed. You can watch this short introduction video with Aaron Shaw.

What is the CDSC?

The Community Data Science Collective (CDSC) is an interdisciplinary research group made of up of faculty and students at the University of Washington Department of Communication, the Northwestern University Department of Communication Studies, the Carleton College Computer Science Department, the School of Information at UT Austin, and the Purdue University School of Communication.

Learn more

If you’d like to learn more or get future updates about the Science of Community Dialogues, please join the low volume announcement list.

Decentralization and the social web revisited

Diagram of centralized, decentralized (hierarchical), and distributed communications networks from Paul Baran's 1964 article "On distributed communications networks."
Figure from Paul Baran’s 1964 article “On distributed communications networks” (https://doi.org/10.1109/TCOM.1964.1088883) and referenced by Christine Lemmer-Webber.

Last Spring, I hosted a “thought leader dialogue” on decentralizing social media through the Northwestern Center for Human-Computer Interaction and Design (HCI+D). It was fantastic and I highly recommend you check out the video.

Afterwards, two of the eponymous “thought-leaders” who headlined that session, Christine Lemmer-Webber and Bryan Newbold followed up with each other in a series of blogposts about decentralization, Bluesky, and the Fediverse.

I recently re-read these while preparing for a guest lecture in an undergraduate class here at NU. Fair warning: Despite the subtext of a debate about systems mainly used for micro-blogging, the posts are very long. That said, if you care about these topics (or are maybe just curious to learn more), all three are pure gold.

It helps to understand a bit about exactly who Christine and Bryan are, or more specifically, why they have among the very most informed and interesting perspectives on the topic. Christine helped to create the ActivityPub protocol and standard that is at the heart of the Fediverse (Mastodon, Lemmy, Pixelfed, PeerTube). She currently leads the Spritely Institute pursuing the design and implementation of the next generation of decentralized communication tech. Bryan is the protocol engineer at Bluesky and, as such, one of the leaders building out the AT Protocol, which powers Bluesky and a whole other small-but-seemingly-growing ecosystem of applications.

The crux of their conversation revolves around the competing visions for the future of the social web being pursued within the respective ActivityPub and AT Protocol “universes.” The posts underscore some of the more profound differences between the two, in particular the questions around “shared heap” vs. “message passing” architectures, the relative degree of (de)centralization each system affords (this is where the diagram originally created by Paul Baran and reproduced at the top of this post comes in), and (more implicitly) the theories of change motivating the design and implementation choices prioritized in their respective work.

It’s worth nothing that both Bryan and Christine are very careful and intentional to call out the overlaps between ActivityPub and AT Proto as well. I also appreciate how respectful and thoughtful they each are given that there are some substantive and high stakes areas of disagreement being addressed in their conversation.

If you read the posts (and I hope you do!) and want to share your responses, please do so in the comments, via email, Toot, Skeet, or sundry other means. There are several of us in the lab pursuing work in these areas and I’m eager to understand perspectives on the topic.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Sophia Vargas on “A review of valuation models and their application to open source models”

In the seventh talk of the Science of Community track we organized for FOSSY, Google FOSS researcher Sophia Vargas offered an overview of different strategies for measuring the value of open source (particularly in the context of a company thinking about how to engage with FOSS).

Some of Sophia’s key insights are: models for measuring one-time cost are relatively widespread (but depend on outcome metrics like lines of code rather than difficulty); understanding the cost of maintenance and community is still in formative stages; and that business leaders can make use of research-grounded models developed to measure value and risk in an academic context into decisionmaking tools within a business context.

This is part 7 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Darius Kazemi on “Community governance models on small-to-mid-size Mastodon servers

In the sixth talk of the Science of Community track we organized for FOSSY, independent FOSS researcher Darius Kazemi described the results of an interview study to learn from the moderation teams of decentralized social network servers. One of Darius’ key observations is the extensive compliance and legally-required work that running such a server requires.

This is part 6 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Bogdan Vasilescu on “Navigating Dependency Abandonment”

In the final talk of the Science of Community track we organized for FOSSY, Computer Science professor and FOSS researcher Dr. Bogdan Vasilescu described his team’s work to understand how developers think about abandoned dependencies. One of the key insights from this work is that abandonment of dependencies is quite common, but that updating a package to remove the abandoned dependencies is very slow — and that one of the factors that drives faster replacement is when projects explicitly announce that they are ending maintenance.

This is part 8 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Kaylea Champion on “Research Says…..Insights on Building, Leading, and Sustaining Open Source”

In the fifth talk of the Science of Community track we organized for FOSSY, Dr. Kaylea Champion describes a series of research results on both how to build high-quality FOSS and how to sustain a community alongside it. One of her key insights is that a great community is no guarantee of a high-quality project — and to serve the public, we need both.

This is part 5 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Paige Cruz on “The Art of Asking”

In the fourth talk of the Science of Community track we organized for FOSSY, principal developer advocate Paige Cruz shared the results of her investigation into the subject of how we can all do a better job of asking questions of one another in FOSS communities. One of her key insights is to invite us to engage with the perspective of those who might answer our question, and to think critically about what details we include and whether they really help others understand and respond — for example, a screenshot of our code can’t be copy pasted and might be unreadable, but a screenshot of a UI bug might replace wordy description.

This is part 4 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Ben Ford on “Private Equity companies only want one thing and it’s….”

In the third talk of the Science of Community track we organized for FOSSY, FOSS leader Ben Ford described his experience navigating the changes in his role when the Puppet project’s commercial partner was acquired by a private equity company. One of the essential takeaways from this talk is the different perspective towards community that a FOSS company takes versus a private equity company, and the challenge of communicating value in this context.

This is part 3 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Matthew Gaughan on “How do FOSS projects actually use new README documents?”

In the second talk of the Science of Community track we organized for FOSSY, CDSC PhD student Matthew Gaughan shared his research to understand how communities actually use README and CONTRIBUTING documents. Although guides to FOSS communities often recommend these documents be extensive and used as part of welcoming new contributors, we find that READMEs are often quite preliminary, and that CONTRIBUTING guides are often a reaction to an influx of contributions.

Excerpt from Matt’s presentation, Graph shows model coefficients for longitudinal activity data around governance document introduction for 2200+ FOSS projects packaged in the Debian GNU/Linux distribution.

This is part 2 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.

FOSSY 2024 Wrap Up: Dawn Foster on “From Data to Action: Using Metrics to Improve FOSS Communities”

Back in July, we kicked off the FOSSY conference Science of Community track with a talk from Dr. Dawn Foster. Dr. Foster shared an update on the work of the CHAOSS project to empower communities to use metrics to understand and improve their practices. Their Practitioner Guide Series, coupled with FOSS analytical tools, will help any community get started on their metrics journey.

This is part 1 of an 8-part series sharing highlights from the Science of Community track at FOSSY. Visit the FOSSY site for more bio details and an abstract of the talk.