Through a larger scope, FOSS/FLOSS is ultimately another form of collective intelligence built by crowds. As similar examples in the same category, there are big data and wiki, although their methodology can vary. These examples require continuous self-inspection and high morale to be actively maintained. If you think about the recent big data related issues and how they make people to be nervous, it’s easy to understand why transparency is critical; people want to know what they participate into.

Emma Irwin said “ …when audience remains homogeneous, and abuse goes unchallenged.” My experience in FOSS participation is close to zero, but I can agree with the sentence due to my past habit of editing wiki. I was intrigued by the amount of information along with its informality, but its informal aspect often allowed collective brutality as well, especially in documents about politics, religion and/or gender. Not to mention that about ten years ago internet users were much more homogenous, so the internal wiki system that is similar to the one (i.e. opening issues and pull request) in Github did not function successfully.

Sometimes it feels like the only solution is time. During ten years, the wiki gradually gained broader spectrum of contributors, which delivered diverse viewpoints and resource in its contents. It's ironic that the wiki simply seems even less peaceful from outside, by its increased number of debates/issues - but that is how people find better ways in real world: by arguing and colliding each other.