User:LaTeeDa/AV

Audio / Video chat discussion

Cons/For
To move the project forward, we will need answers to the 'Cons', and documentation for the 'Fors'

Cons:


 * 1) Reduces participation - because of time constraints (not everyone can make every meeting)
 * 2) Reduces participation - not everyone can participate (deaf/mute/shy/non-English speakers/anonymity)
 * 3) Reduces openness - audio or video discussions are inherently harder to search, review, log, than text discussions
 * 4) Reduces openness - AV discussions create social orders and cabals that creates 'insiders' and 'outsiders'
 * 5) Increases bullying
 * 6) Reduces discussion quality - text discussions inspire deep thinking, referencing, etc., AV do not
 * 7) Distraction and wastes time - if you want a social network go to Facebook.
 * 8) Isn't Wikipedia - AV would fundamentally make Wikipedia unrecognizable. Go make your own encyclopedia.
 * 9) Expensive, and would require new revenue or ending WP non-ad environment
 * 10) IRC has been a big headache for WP. AV would be bigger.

For:


 * 1) Improves efficiency - discussions can happen with less editor effort
 * 2) Deflates disagreements and helps build trust and consensus
 * 3) Helps strengthen WP social fabric, improving editor dedication,
 * 4) Helps build accountability. Individuals who have AV discussions are more likely to hold each other accountable.
 * 5) Attracts new editors, especially female and other editors who are underrepresented See this.
 * 6) Tools and policies can make AV transparent, and can log discussions
 * 7) Reduces bullying
 * 8) Use of AV tools would be optional
 * 9) RWA

WP on IRC

 * IRC
 * Category:User essays on IRC
 * WikiProject IRC collaboration abandoned IRC collaboration project for specific articles. Looks like it was low profile.

Old VP discussions

 * Village pump (proposals)/Archive 85 from Jan 2012
 * Village pump (proposals)/Archive 43 from Feb 2009