Jimmy Wales: How a ragtag band created Wikipedia

譯者: Chih-Yuan Jen (任致遠) 審譯者: Adrienne Lin

Charles Van Doren, who was later a senior editor of Britannica,

1962年，還沒成為Britannica百科資深編輯的Charles Van Doren曾說，

said the ideal encyclopedia should be radical --

最理想的百科全書應該要是反叛的─它不該滿足於保守安全

it should stop being safe.

But if you know anything about the history of Britannica since 1962,

但如果你略知Britannica百科從1962創立至今的歷史，

it was anything but radical:

就會發現它毫無叛逆因子：

still a very completely safe, stodgy type of encyclopedia.

它仍然是保守平庸到不行的百科全書

Wikipedia, on the other hand, begins with a very radical idea,

反觀維基百科的創立，卻是源於一個非常顛覆的概念，

and that's for all of us to imagine a world

它讓我們創造一個空間

in which every single person on the planet

在這裡，每個人無論你我，都能夠

is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge.

對人類知識的積累自由貢獻

And that's what we're doing.

這就是我們正在進行的事。所以，維基百科

So Wikipedia --

you just saw the little demonstration of it --

你會發現維基很少指導使用者該怎麼做，

it's a freely licensed encyclopedia.

它是自由授權的百科。它由成千上萬的志願者所撰寫

It's written by thousands of volunteers

all over the world in many, many languages.

他們來自世界各個角落，使用各自的語言

It's written using wiki software --

人們藉由維基軟體撰寫

which is the type of software he just demonstrated --

軟體的使用就如剛剛所示範的

so anyone can quickly edit and save,

所以每個人都能輕易編撰和儲存，

and it goes live on the Internet immediately.

即時、直接轉成網路上的內容

And everything about Wikipedia is managed by virtually an all-volunteer staff.

維基百科的一切，是由一群幾乎全是志願的工作人員所管理

So when Yochai is talking about new methods of organization,

所以當Yochai正高談闊論組織的新方法時

he's exactly describing Wikipedia.

他其實正是在描述維基百科。而我今天要做的事

And what I'm going to do today

is tell you a little bit more about how it really works on the inside.

就是向你們多透露一點，維基內部是怎麼運作的。

So Wikipedia's owned by the Wikimedia Foundation,

維基百科的所有權歸屬於我所創立的維基媒體基金會

which I founded,

a nonprofit organization.

And our goal, the core aim of the Wikimedia Foundation,

那是一個非營利組織。而我們的目標，維基媒體基金會的核心目標，

is to get a free encyclopedia to every single person on the planet.

就是在世上創立一個，對每個人都自由開放的百科全書

And so, if you think about what that means,

如果你在思考這究竟意味著什麼

it means a lot more than just building a cool website.

這表示，這遠不止是搭設一個很厲害的網站

We're really interested in all the issues of the digital divide,

我們很關心各種議題：資訊鴻溝、貧窮問題

poverty worldwide,

empowering people everywhere to have the information that they need

讓人們無論身處何處，都能得到他們需要的訊息

to make good decisions.

And so we're going to have to do a lot of work

做出更好的選擇

所以我們需要做得更多，而不再只是停留在提供人們網路這樣的程度

that goes beyond just the Internet.

And so that's a big part of why we've chosen the free licensing model,

所以我們選擇免費自由的授權模式

because that empowers local entrepreneurs or anyone who wants to --

這樣就能授權當地的企業家--

they can take our content and do anything they like with it --

或任何一個人獲取百科的內容

愛怎麼用就怎麼用：可以複製、可以散播分享

you can copy it, redistribute it --

and you can do it commercially or non-commercially.

可以用在商業或其他用途

So there's a lot of opportunities that are going to arise around Wikipedia

很多機會隨著維基百科應運而生

all over the world.

全世界都有

We're funded by donations from the public,

我們是由大眾的捐款所支持

and one of the more interesting things about that

而另一件相關的趣事是

is how little money it actually takes to run Wikipedia.

維持維基運作所需的成本是多麼地少

So Yochai showed you the graph of what the cost of a printing press was.

Yochai剛剛讓你們看了紙面出版成本的圖表

And I'm going to tell you what the cost of Wikipedia is.

而我將告訴你們維基的成本為何

But first, I'll show you how big it is.

So we've got over 600,000 articles in English.

但我會先告訴各位，維基的規模有多大

我們有超過60萬篇英文文章

We've got two million total articles across many, many different languages.

全球不同語言的文章合計起來，共有二百萬篇

The biggest languages are German, Japanese, French --

規模最大的使用語言是德文、日文和法文

all the Western-European languages are quite big.

所有西歐的語言都有不小的規模

But only around one-third of all of our traffic to our web

但維基的總瀏覽量，只有大約三分之一

clusters to the English Wikipedia,

是在觀看維基的英文頁面

which is surprising to a lot of people.

這令很多人感到訝異

A lot of people think in a very English-centric way on the Internet,

很多人都是以英文為中心的角度來看待網路

but for us, we're truly global.

We're in many, many languages.

但對我們而言，維基卻是全球性的，有非常多種語言

How popular we've gotten to be -- we're a top-50 website

是多麼受到使用者的歡迎阿：維基榮登前50大網站

and we're more popular than the New York Times.

普及率甚至超越紐約時報

So this is where we get to Yochai's discussion.

這就連結到Yochai的論點

This shows the growth of Wikipedia -- we're the blue line there --

這展現了維基百科的成長--就是這條藍色的曲線--

and this is the New York Times over there.

而另一條則是紐約時報的成長曲線

And what's interesting about this

is the New York Times website is a huge, enormous corporate operation

有趣的是，紐約時報的網站是個規模巨大、

有著浩大的組織運作，並且擁有好幾名員工，

with I have no idea how many hundreds of employees.

We have exactly one employee,

我們實際上只有一名員工

and that employee is our lead software developer.

他是我們的軟體研發組長

And he's only been our employee since January 2005,

而他開始為維基服務的時間，也不過是2006年的事

all the other growth before that ...

維基的成長卻都在這之前發生

So the servers are managed by a ragtag band of volunteers.

所以維基的伺服器都是由一群隨意集結的志願者所管理

All the editing is done by volunteers.

而編輯工作也是由志願者完成

And the way that we're organized

我們組織團隊的方式

is not like any traditional organization you can imagine.

並不同於任何傳統的組織結構

People are always asking, "Well, who's in charge of this?"

人們總會問：「那麼，誰是這項工作的負責人呢？」

or "Who does that?"

或問「這是誰做的？」這些問題的正解是：任何想參與的人

And the answer is: anybody who wants to pitch in.

It's a very unusual and chaotic thing.

這既不尋常也亂無章法

We've got over 90 servers now in three locations.

維基目前在三處共有90個伺服器

These are managed by volunteer system administrators who are online.

由志願的線上系統管理員所管理

I can go online any time of the day or night

我可以隨時連上網路

and see eight to 10 people waiting for me

看到線上已有8到10人

to ask a question or something, anything about the servers.

為我解答任何網路伺服的問題

You could never afford to do this in a company.

這是任何一個傳統公司所無法負擔的服務

You could never afford

to have a standby crew of people 24 hours a day

公司是無法提供隨時待命的員工

and do what we're doing at Wikipedia.

能像維基這樣24小時無休

So we're doing around 1.4 billion page views monthly,

也因此，我們擁有每月14億的網頁瀏覽量

so it's really gotten to be a huge thing.

這真的成了一件不容忽視的大事

And everything is managed by the volunteers.

每項分工都是由志工負責

And the total monthly cost for our bandwidth is about 5,000 dollars.

每月用在頻寬的開支大約為5,000美元

And that's essentially our main cost.

We could actually do without the employee.

這已是我們最主要的開銷了

我們幾乎不用聘僱任何人。實際上，

We hired Brian because he was working part-time for two years

我們之所以雇用Brian，是因為他兼差工作了兩年

and full-time at Wikipedia,

卻是義務全職地為維基服務

so we actually hired him,

so he could get a life and go to the movies sometimes.

所以我們決定聘用他，讓他能擁有較好的生活，也可以偶爾看看電影。

So the big question when you've got this really chaotic organization is,

對於我們這個亂無章法的組織，大家常有的大哉問是

why isn't it all rubbish?

Why is the website as good as it is?

它為什麼不會淪為一堆垃圾文字？為什麼能成為這麼好的網站？

First of all, how good is it?

Well, it's pretty good.

首先，先得釐清它有多好？是還算不錯，雖不完美，

It isn't perfect,

but it's much better than you would expect,

但它的成果已遠遠超出你所能期待的，

given our completely chaotic model.

So when you saw him make a ridiculous edit to the page about me,

就憑這麼一個放縱混亂的模式。

所以當你看到某人在我的百科條目修訂了毫無道理的內容

you think, "Oh, this is obviously just going to degenerate into rubbish."

你心想，噢這顯然會讓這篇內容徹底瓦解成垃圾內容

But when we've seen quality tests --

and there haven't been enough of these yet

但當我們進行文章的品質分析，這樣的情形並不普遍

and I'm really encouraging people to do more,

反而我一直很鼓勵大眾再多編改一些

comparing Wikipedia to traditional things --

維基相較於傳統百科，我們能很輕易地勝出

we win hands down.

So a German magazine compared German Wikipedia,

某德國雜誌將維基德文版，

which is much, much smaller than English,

當然，德文版的規模遠不及英文版，

to Microsoft Encarta and to Brockhaus multimedial,

將其與微軟的Encarta數位百科，以及最大的德語百科Brockhaus數位版相比

and we won across the board.

They hired experts to come and look at articles and compare the quality,

維基在每個評比層面都勝過另外兩者

這份雜誌邀請專家審試三家百科的文章，比較各家品質

and we were very pleased with that result.

我們對這份分析結果感到非常雀躍

So a lot of people have heard about the Wikipedia Bush-Kerry controversy.

很多人聽聞過維基的「小布希-凱利」論戰

The media has covered this somewhat extensively.

媒體對此事的報導，多少有些過度解讀

It started out with an article in Red Herring.

這爭論起於「紅鯡魚Red Herring」雜誌的一篇文章

The reporters called me up and they --

那個記者打給我，然後--我要先強調

I mean, I have to say they spelled my name right,

他們把我的名字拼對了，但他們真正想說的是

but they really wanted to say the Bush-Kerry election is so contentious,

「小布希-凱利」的選舉太有爭議了

it's tearing apart the Wikipedia community.

它會分化維基的社群。所以他們引用了我的話，寫道：

And so they quote me as saying,

"They're the most contentious in the history of Wikipedia."

「他們是維基創立以來最具爭議的人物」

What I actually said is they're not contentious at all.

但我實際上所要表達的是，他們一點都不具有爭議

So it's a slight misquote.

那句話的引用有點被誤解了。那篇文章用字強烈

(Laughter)

The articles were edited quite heavily.

And it is true that we did have to lock the articles

在某些狀況下，我們也的確需要封鎖文章

on a couple of occasions.

Time magazine recently reported that

時代雜誌最近曾報導

"Extreme action sometimes has to be taken,

「極端的行動有時是必要的，

and Wales locked the entries on Kerry and Bush for most of 2004."

而Wales在2004年時，就選擇封鎖凱利和小布希的條目。」

This came after I told the reporter that we had to lock it for --

這篇報導是在我告訴記者說，我們必須封鎖，

occasionally a little bit here and there.

視情況封鎖一些而已

So the truth in general is that the kinds of controversies

事實上一般而言，類似這樣的爭議

that you would probably think we have within the Wikipedia community

這些你認為可能在維基社群內引起爭議的議題

are not really controversies at all.

其實一點都不算是爭議

Articles on controversial topics are edited a lot,

爭議性的條目文章常被線上編修

but they don't cause much controversy within the community.

但並不常在網路社群中引發爭端

And the reason for this is that most people understand the need for neutrality.

這是因為大部分的人們瞭解採取中立態度的重要性

The real struggle is not between the right and the left --

真正在互相對抗的，並不是左右之爭

that's where most people assume --

but it's between the party of the thoughtful

雖然大部分的人都這麼以為

但實際上，這卻是一場理智思考和無理取鬧之間的戰爭

and the party of the jerks.

And no side of the political spectrum

人們無論傾向哪種政治色彩，都有可能是理智抑或愚昧的

has a monopoly on either of those qualities.

The actual truth about the specific Bush-Kerry incident

小布希-凱利事件的真相是

is that the Bush-Kerry articles

2004年，那些關於這兩位候選人的文章中

were locked less than one percent of the time in 2004,

真正被封鎖的只佔不到1%

and it wasn't because they were contentious;

這些被封鎖的內容，不是因為它們的爭議性

it was just because there was routine vandalism --

而是因為它們被反覆惡意破壞

which happens sometimes even on stage ...

這些破壞有時甚至是故意做給別人看的，

(Laughter)

Sometimes even reporters have reported to me that they vandalized Wikipedia

有時連記者都告訴我，他們惡搞維基的行徑

and were amazed that it was fixed so quickly.

竟然能這麼快就被修正了

And I said -- you know, I always say, please don't do that.

我說，我一向都這麼勸告--請別這麼做，這不大好

That's not a good thing.

So how do we do this?

所以，我們是怎麼辦到的?

How do we manage the quality control?

我們是如何做到品質控管的?

How does it work?

這是怎麼運作的?

So there's a few elements,

有一些要素

mostly social policies and some elements of the software.

大部分是關於人際的方針指導和一部分的軟體要件

So the biggest and the most important thing

最大也最重要的要素，就是我們的「中立觀點」方針

is our neutral point of view policy.

This is something that I set down, from the very beginning,

這是我最初就設定好的原則

as a core principle of the community that's completely not debatable.

以它作為社群的核心原則，完全不容爭辯討論

It's a social concept of cooperation,

這是合作關係的人際原則

so we don't talk a lot about truth and objectivity.

所以我們不常談論事實或客觀性

The reason for this is if we say

原因是，如果我們宣稱我們只寫題目中「事實」的部份

we're only going to write the "truth" about some topic,

that doesn't do us a damn bit of good of figuring out what to write,

這天殺的一點都不會幫助我們知道究竟該寫什麼

because I don't agree with you about what's the truth.

因為我不認同你所認為的「事實」是事實

But we have this jargon term of neutrality,

但我們採用「中立」這個用語

which has its own long history within the community,

這個詞的使用在社群中已有很長的歷史

which basically says, any time there's a controversial issue,

這基本上是在說明，只要出現有爭議的議題

Wikipedia itself should not take a stand on the issue.

維基本身並不該選邊站

We should merely report on what reputable parties have said about it.

我們只能報導聲譽良好的團體提出的評論

So this neutrality policy is really important for us

所以這個中立方針對我們而言相當重要

because it empowers a community that is very diverse

因為維基授權給予的是多元的大眾社群

to come together and actually get some work done.

齊聚合作，並且真的完成一些作品

So we have very diverse contributors

我們的資訊來自多元的成員，各有不同的政治、宗教

in terms of political, religious, cultural backgrounds.

和文化背景

By having this firm neutrality policy,

藉由這個穩固的中立方針

which is non-negotiable from the beginning,

這個從最初設定，就是不容妥協的政策

we ensure that people can work together

我們確保大家能通力合作

and that the entries don't become simply a war

而不致讓各個條目淪為唇槍舌戰的戰場

back and forth between the left and the right.

在左右立場之間拉扯擺盪

If you engage in that type of behavior, you'll be asked to leave the community.

如果你也參與了這種狂熱的攻訐暴動

你會被勒令禁止參與我們的撰寫團隊

So, real-time peer review.

Every single change on the site goes to the "Recent changes" page.

所以，即時的同儕檢閱

網站上的每一項更動，都會匯集到「最近更改」頁面

So as soon as he made his change, it went to the "Recent changes" page.

所以每當某人更動了內容，就會在「最近更改」頁面顯示

That recent changes page was also fed into an IRC channel,

那個頁面也會同時送到IRC聊天頻道

which is an Internet chat channel

那是個網路聊天頻道

that people are monitoring with various software tools.

人們在上面利用各種軟體工具監督更動的內容

And people can get RSS feeds --

而人們能收到RSS回饋訊息--

they can get email notifications of changes.

他們能收到頁面更動的電子郵件通知

And then users can set up their own personal watch list.

使用者能選擇自己的監督清單

So my page is on quite a few volunteers' watch lists,

像是我的頁面，就有數個志願者將它列在監督清單上

because it is sometimes vandalized.

以避免偶發的惡意破壞

And therefore, what happens is someone will notice the change very quickly,

如此一來，任何內容的更動都會很快被發現

and then they'll just simply revert the change.

他們只要輕輕一按，就能恢復原樣

There's a "new pages feed," for example,

so you can go to a certain page of Wikipedia

比如說，維基有頁面更新通知的設計

and see every new page as it's created.

你能夠連到維基的頁面

This is really important

看到每一項更動過的內容

because a lot of new pages are just garbage that has to be deleted,

這是個很重要的設計。因為，很多新創立的頁面

往往是該直接刪除的垃圾內容，像是鍵盤左到右ASDF亂打的一樣。

you know, "ASDFASDF."

But also, that's some of the most interesting and fun things,

不過，這同時也是維基最有趣也最耐人尋味的特質

some of the new articles.

People will start an article on some interesting topic,

某些新頁面新文章

人們會撰寫新鮮的話題

other people will find that intriguing

挑起其他讀者的興趣

and jump in and help and make it much better.

繼而投身修正條目的行列

So we do have edits by anonymous users,

所以，我們確實有很多匿名編輯者

which is one of the most controversial and intriguing things about Wikipedia.

這也是維基最引發爭論、也引起熱烈討論的部分

So, Chris was able to do his change -- he didn't have to log in or anything;

所以Chris能夠直接更動--不需要登入或做任何事

he just went on the website and made a change.

他只要連到網站，就能直接更動內容

But it turns out that only about 18 percent

of all the edits to the website

維基的現況卻是，只有18%的編輯修訂

are done by anonymous users.

And that's a really important thing to understand:

是由匿名者所更動

理解這件事是相當重要的

the vast majority of the edits that go on on the website

那就是，網站上絕大多數的修訂

are from a very close-knit community of maybe 600 to 1,000 people

是源自於一個大概600到1,000人、非常緊密連結的社群

who are in constant communication.

And we have over 40 IRC channels, 40 mailing lists.

他們持續溝通

我們有超過40個IRC聊天頻道，40組郵件列表

All these people know each other.

They communicate. We have off-line meetings.

他們都互相認識、溝通，也有離線的會議討論

These are the people who are doing the bulk of the site,

網站上大部分的內容，是由他們所完成的

and they are, in a sense, semi-professionals at what they're doing.

某個層面來說，我們甚至可以稱他們為半專業的編輯

The standards we set for ourselves

我們為自己設定的標準

are equal to or higher than professional standards of quality.

絕對不亞於專業百科的標準

We don't always meet those standards, but that's what we're striving for.

我們未必每次都能達到理想狀況

And so that tight community is who really cares for the site,

不過這是我們傾力追求的目標

網路集結的編撰社群是認真看待這個網站

and these are some of the smartest people I've ever met.

他們之中有我認識過最聰明的人

It's my job to say that, but it's actually true.

稱讚他們，一部分是我的職責所在，但也的確是事實

The type of people who were drawn to writing an encyclopedia for fun

會為了樂趣而投入於百科撰寫工程的人

tend to be pretty smart people.

通常都是蠻聰明的一群

The tools and the software: there's lots of tools that allow us --

這些工具和軟體：網站上有很多工具能讓我們--

allow us, meaning the community --

讓我們整個社群能夠自我檢閱，也能全盤檢閱成果

to self-monitor and to monitor all the work.

This is an example of a page history on "flat Earth,"

「世界是平的」，這就是其中一個例子

and you can see some changes that were made.

你能看見改變

What's nice about this page is you can immediately take a look at this

這個現象最棒的是，你能即時地看到它

and see, "OK, I understand now."

然後「嗯，我懂了」

When somebody goes and looks at --

每當人們上去看，發現有某人

they see that someone, an anonymous IP number,

made an edit to my page.

使用匿名IP位址，修訂了我的頁面

That sounds suspicious. Who is this person?

感覺很可疑，「他是誰？」當人們看到這個狀況

Somebody looks at it --

they can immediately see highlighted in red

他們能看到那些被修改處，以紅色重點標示出來

all of the changes that took place --

to see, OK, well, these words have changed, things like this.

能夠知道：「噢，這些文字被更動了」

So that's one tool that we can use

藉由這個功能，我們能非常迅速地檢視頁面的修訂紀錄

to very quickly monitor the history of a page.

Another thing that we do within the community

我們在社群內所做的另一件事

is we leave everything very open-ended.

就是，我們給予非常少的限制

Most of the social rules and the methods of work

大部分的人際規範和工作方法

are left completely open-ended in the software.

在軟體介面內是不設限制的

All of that stuff is just on Wiki pages.

這些軟體都在維基的頁面上

And so there's nothing in the software that enforces the rules.

所以軟體内沒有任何會強化規範的東西

The example I've got up here is the Votes for Deletion page.

「頁面存廢表決」就是一例

So, I mentioned earlier, people type "ASDFASDF" --

就像我前面所說的，某些人會亂打一堆無意義的字(ASDFASDF)

it needs to be deleted.

Cases like that, the administrators just delete it.

這些內容應該被刪除。像這樣的情況，管理員會直接刪除它。

There's no reason to have a big argument about it.

這毫無爭議。

But you can imagine there's a lot of other areas where the question is,

但你知道，頁面勢必會有別的問題

is this notable enough to go in an encyclopedia?

有人會問，這些內容是否重要到足以納入百科內？

Is the information verifiable? Is it a hoax? Is it true? Is it what?

它們能通過檢驗嗎？是惡作劇還是事實？它究竟是什麼？

So we needed a social method for figuring out the answer to this.

所以我們需要一個人際互動的方法來解決這件事

And so the method that arose organically within the community

這個能夠在社群中自主互動的方法

is the Votes For Deletion page.

And in the particular example we have here,

就是「頁面存廢表決」

it's a film, "Twisted Issues,"

這裡舉一個特定的例子，一部電影

and the first person says,

「Twisted Issues」，第一個發言討論的人說

"Now this is supposedly a film. It fails the Google test miserably."

「這應該是一部電影。它在Google檢測中敗得一塌糊塗」

The Google test is you look in Google and see if it's there,

所謂Google檢測，就是利用Google查詢該事物

because if something's not even in Google, it probably doesn't exist at all.

如果連Google都搜尋不到，它很有可能根本不存在。

It's not a perfect rule,

but it's a nice starting point for quick research.

這不是個完美通則，但快速搜尋能夠當作驗證的起點

So somebody says, "Delete it, please. Delete it -- it's not notable."

有人會說：「刪掉它吧，它幾乎就像不存在了」

And then somebody says, "Wait, I found it. I found it in a book,

然後另一些人就說「等等，我找到它了，

'Film Threat Video Guide: the 20 Underground Films You Must See.'"

它在一本「恐怖電影指南：

你不可錯過的20部地下電影」裡有出現

So the next persons says, "Clean it up."

噢，好吧。所以下一個人說「整理它吧」

Somebody says, "I've found it on IMDB. Keep, keep, keep."

有人說「我在IMDB網站找到了。保留、保留、保留」

And what's interesting about this is that the software is --

而這裡有趣的是，這個軟體是--

these votes are just text typed into a page.

這裡所謂投票，不過是討論區內大家發表的意見

This is not really a vote so much as it is a dialogue.

與其說這是投票，不如說這其實是討論

Now it is true that at the end of the day,

事實上，當一天過去

an administrator can go through here and take a look at this and say,

管理員可以上來觀看雙方意見和討論，得到結論

"OK, 18 deletes, two keeps: we'll delete it."

「18票刪除，2票保留，所以我們決定刪除它」

But in other cases, this could be 18 deletes and two keeps,

但在其他狀況下，即使18票刪除2票保留，仍有可能會選擇保留

and we would keep it, because if those last two keeps say,

"Wait a minute. Nobody else saw this but I found it in a book,

如果那兩票提到「等等，

其他人都沒找到資料，但我找到了這本書，

and I found a link to a page that describes it,

而且我也在網路上發現有頁面提到它，我接下來會好好整理這項條目

and I'm going to clean it up tomorrow, so please don't delete it,"

所以請不要刪除他」

then it would survive.

And it also matters who the people are who are voting.

此外，參與討論投票的人是什麼背景也是相當重要

Like I say, it's a tight-knit community.

就如同我所說的，這是個緊密連結的社群

Down here at the bottom, "Keep, real movie," RickK.

整篇討論最後的發言是Rick Kay寫的：「保留。這是真的電影」

RickK is a very famous Wikipedian who does an enormous amount of work

Rick Kay是個非常有名的維基人

with vandalism, hoaxes and votes for deletion.

他處理了很多維基的惡意破壞、惡作劇

His voice carries a lot of weight within the community

也參與許多頁面存廢表決

他在社群內的發言是擲地有聲的

because he knows what he's doing.

他很清楚自己在做什麼

So how is all this governed?

那麼，這一切是如何運作、維持的呢?

People really want to know about administrators, things like that.

人們總是對於「管理員」之類的角色感到好奇

So the Wikipedia governance model, the governance of the community,

所以維基的管理機制，維持社群運作的機制

is a very confusing, but workable mix of consensus --

是個非常混亂卻又可行的，綜合共識的結果

meaning we try not to vote on the content of articles,

這意味著，我們並不想以多數決來決定文章的存廢

because the majority view is not necessarily neutral --

因為佔多數的意見未必是中立持平的

some amount of democracy --

all of the administrators --

有部份的民主投票，所有的管理員--

these are the people who have the ability to delete pages.

他們有權限能刪除頁面

That doesn't mean that they have the right to delete pages.

這不表示他們有權力任意刪除頁面

They still have to follow all the rules -- but they're elected by the community.

他們仍須遵守所有的規則。不過他們是民選的

他們是在維基社群中被選舉出來的。有些時候

Sometimes people -- random trolls on the Internet --

有些鮮少上網找資料的人，會指控我黑箱操控維基管理員

like to accuse me of handpicking the administrators

to bias the content of the encyclopedia.

造成內容的偏差

I always laugh at this, because I have no idea how they're elected, actually.

我總是對此一笑置之，因為實際上，我對於管理員究竟是如何選出來的毫無所知

There's a certain amount of aristocracy.

社群中確實有一些意見領袖

You got a hint of that when I mentioned, like,

你們應該能從我剛剛所述中察覺端倪，例如

RickK's voice would carry a lot more weight

Rick Kay的意見會比其他默默無聞的發言者要具影響力

than someone we don't know.

I give this talk sometimes with Angela,

我有時候會這麼告訴Angela，她剛再度選上

who was just re-elected to the board from the community --

成為社群委員--成為基金會的委員

to the Board of the Foundation,

with more than twice the votes of the person who didn't make it.

她獲得的票數超過落選者的兩倍

And I always embarrass her because I say,

我常消遣她，因為我會說，舉Angela為例，

"Well, Angela, for example,

could get away with doing absolutely anything within Wikipedia,

她能夠在維基做任何事，得逞而不受制裁

because she's so admired and so powerful."

因為她已累積一定聲望，有很大的影響力

But the irony is, of course, that Angela can do this because she's the one person

但關鍵的癥結點在於，Angela能有這樣的力量，是因為

who you know would never, ever break any rules of Wikipedia.

她無論如何，絕對不會打破維基的規則

And I also like to say she's the only person

我也必須說，她是唯一

who actually knows all the rules of Wikipedia, so ...

真的了解所有維基規則的人

And then there's monarchy,

and that's my role on the community, so ...

而這是個王國，我扮演的是領導者的角色，所以

(Laughter)

I was describing this in Berlin once,

當我在柏林這麼比喻，隔天報紙

and the next day in the newspaper the headline said,

"I am the Queen of England."

就以頭版頭條寫道「我自比為英國女皇」

(Laughter)

And that's not exactly what I said, but --

這完全不是我所說的，不過

(Laughter)

the point is my role in the community --

重點是我在社群中的角色

Within the free software world, there's been a long-standing tradition

在免費軟體的領域，

存在有「仁慈的獨裁者」的體制傳統

of the "benevolent dictator" model.

So if you look at most of the major free software projects,

觀察大部分的大型免費軟體計畫

they have one single person in charge

who everyone agrees is the benevolent dictator.

都有一個擔任領袖的代表人物

人們都認同，他就是那個「仁慈的獨裁者」的角色

Well, I don't like the term "benevolent dictator,"

這個嘛，我並不喜歡這個稱號

and I don't think that it's my job or my role in the world of ideas

我也不認為我的工作是在這創意王國裡稱王

to be the dictator of the future of all human knowledge

這是全民創作的人類知識演進史，在這裡當一個獨裁國王

compiled by the world.

It just isn't appropriate.

一點都不適合

But there is a need still for a certain amount of monarchy,

不過某個程度上，維基仍然需要統治階層的存在

a certain amount of --

sometimes we have to make a decision

某個程度--有時候我們必須做出決斷

and we don't want to get bogged down too heavily

我們不想過度陷入眾人意見的漩渦中

in formal decision-making processes.

影響到正式的決策過程

So as an example of how this can be important:

接下來的例子，說明為什麼

we recently had a situation where a neo-Nazi website discovered Wikipedia,

這麼決定是重要的

最近我們遇到一個狀況，某個新納粹團體發現了維基

and they said, "Oh, well, this is horrible,

他們說「噢真慘，這網站根本就是猶太人的陰謀

this Jewish conspiracy of a website,

and we're going to get certain articles deleted that we don't like.

我們要把那些惹人厭的文章刪掉，

And we see they have a voting process, so we're going to send --

我們發現他們有使用存廢投票機制，所以--

we have 40,000 members and we're going to send them over

我們有四萬個會員，我們要集結起來

and they're all going to vote and get these pages deleted."

讓他們投票，於是這些文章就能從此消失了」

Well, they managed to get 18 people to show up.

結果，他們最後弄來了18個人

That's neo-Nazi math for you.

這就是新納粹的數學邏輯

They always think they've got 40,000 members when they've got 18.

他們總以為他們有四萬個成員，但卻只能集合18個人

But they managed to get 18 people to come and vote in a fairly absurd way

不過他們集結了這18個人到維基，用非常可笑的方式投票

to delete a perfectly valid article.

Of course, the vote ended up being about 85 to 18,

決議刪除一篇以事實為基礎的文章

當然，最後的投票結果是85比18

so there was no real danger to our democratic processes.

整場事件並沒有真正威脅到我們的民主機制

On the other hand, people said, "But what are we going to do?

但另一方面，有些人會問「這樣的情況我們能怎麼辦呢？

I mean, this could happen.

What if some group gets really seriously organized

這的確可能發生，萬一有心人士認真地組織起來

and comes in and wants to vote?"

一擁而入來投票呢？」

Then I said, "Well, fuck it, we'll just change the rules."

我會回答「噢去他的，我們就修改規則吧」

That's my job in the community:

這就是我在網路社群裡的工作：聲明我們不允許維基的開放性

to say we won't allow our openness and freedom

to undermine the quality of the content.

和自由度削弱、敗壞內容的品質

And so, as long as people trust me in my role,

只要人們相信我能扮演好這個決策的角色

then that's a valid place for me.

我就有存在的價值

Of course, because of the free licensing,

當然，因為維基的自由授權，只要我濫用我的職權

if I do a bad job, the volunteers are more than happy to take and leave --

那些原本志願參與的人們自然會抽身離開

I can't tell anyone what to do.

我就不再能指導任何人做事

So the final point here is that to understand how Wikipedia works,

所以我介紹的最後一項重點就是，了解維基的運作方式

it's important to understand that our wiki model is the way we work,

瞭解所謂維基體制就是現在我們合作的方式，的確很重要

but we are not fanatical web anarchists.

但我們不是無可救藥的網路無政府主義者。事實上，

In fact, we're very flexible about the social methodology,

我們對於人際方法論抱持著彈性的態度

because ultimately, the passion of the community

因為最終，大眾的熱情投入是為了追求百科成果的高品質

is for the quality of the work,

not necessarily for the process that we use to generate it.

而不是找出最厲害的方法來產出百科內容

Thank you.

(Applause)

謝謝大家

(掌聲)

Ben Saunders: Yeah, hi, Ben Saunders.

Jimmy, you mentioned impartiality being a key to Wikipedia's success.

Ben Saunders：嗨，我是Ben Saunders

Jimmy，你剛剛提到公正性是維基成功的關鍵

It strikes me that much of the textbooks that are used to educate our children

這激發了我一個想法，很多教科書

are inherently biased.

用在教育孩童，卻基本上是有主觀偏見的觀點

Have you found Wikipedia being used by teachers

就你所知，有老師運用維基百科在教學上嗎?

and how do you see Wikipedia changing education?

你如何看待維基對教育的改變?

Jimmy Wales: Yeah, so, a lot of teachers are beginning to use Wikipedia.

Jimmy Wales: 是的，很多老師們開始使用維基百科。另外，

There's a media storyline about Wikipedia, which I think is false.

有一段媒體報導的維基故事，我認為有錯誤。

It builds on the storyline of bloggers versus newspapers.

它是依據網路部落格的內容，而非報章雜誌。

And the storyline is, there's this crazy thing, Wikipedia,

這真的是件瘋狂的事，那個故事是說，

but academics hate it and teachers hate it.

學者討厭維基，老師也一樣討厭維基。結果顯示這並非事實

And that turns out to not be true.

The last time I got an email from a journalist saying,

上次我接到一封來自記者的信寫道，

"Why do academics hate Wikipedia?"

「為什麼學者討厭維基？」

I sent it from my Harvard email address

我用我在哈佛大學的信箱回信給他，

because I was recently appointed a fellow there.

因為我剛被哈佛任命為他們的一份子

And I said, "Well, they don't all hate it."

我說「他們並不是每個都討厭維基」

(Laughter)

But I think there's going to be huge impacts.

不過我認為這將成為巨大的影響

And we actually have a project that I'm personally really excited about,

我們的確有個計畫

which is the Wikibooks project,

我個人為此感到很興奮

which is an effort to create textbooks in all the languages.

那就是「維基教科書Wikibooks」計畫

這個計畫希望能建立各種語言的線上教科書

And that's a much bigger project.

而這是一個更浩大的工程

It's going to take 20 years or so to come to fruition.

它會耗上20年左右才能收成

But part of that is to fulfill our mission

不過它一部分是為了完成我們的使命

of giving an encyclopedia to every single person on the planet.

希望能讓地球上每個人都能利用到百科

We don't mean we're going to Spam them with AOL-style CDs.

我們並非打算像「美國線上」CD那樣，大量發送廣告

We mean we're going to give them a tool that they can use.

我們所希望的是，給予大家一個能夠使用的工具

And for a lot of people in the world,

而對這世界上大部分的人來說

if I give you an encyclopedia that's written at a university level,

如果給你一個大學程度的百科

it doesn't do you any good without a whole host of literacy materials

這可能毫無用處

因為在那之前，並沒有先給你完整的專業能力素材

to build you up to the point where you can actually use it.

好讓你建立起知識系統，足以使用百科

The Wikibooks project is an effort to do that.

所以維基教科書計畫就是在這方面做努力

And I think that we're going to see -- it may not even come from us;

而我認為我們將會看到一個巨大的--

雖然未必是我們所促成的

there's all kinds of innovation going on.

有很多創新的概念正在蓬勃發展

But freely licensed textbooks are the next big thing in education.

自由授權的課本會是教育的下一個重要革命