Class Discussion

Post your comments about today's class here..

Rough consensus and normative design

The discussion today, and in the reading, seemed to describe the designers of proto-Internet and Internet technologies as largely driven by non-normative, technocratic design principles that made choices and decisions based on consensus as to how best to solve a particular problem. Part of the problem I see with this is that the lack of strong normative goals in their design is inferred, at least in part, from a lack of public discussion of the normative goals on parallel track to the technical consensus building.

I guess I wonder to what extent these developers were just implementing normative, though perhaps unquestioned, goals that they all shared--though shared culture, nationality, training, gender, race, etc. Maybe the lack of an identification layer is a technical decision, but maybe it's also the result normative view point that anonymous speech is more important than prevent hate speech, etc. Just because they didn't talk about that doesn't seem to be to say conclusively that the design choices of what the network would afford wasn't always a moral or social, in addition to technical, norms formation process. --Mgalese 18:12, 10 March 2008 (EDT)

Don't assume that technocratic design principles are separate from strong normative goals; "rough consensus and running code" is a normative choice about how to make decisions and what values to prioritize. erin 15:05, 11 March 2008 (EDT)

Right. I guess that makes sense, since rough consensus is at the very least a statement about the rights of minority viewpoints. It strikes me that our "Eden" story of internet isn't really a technocratic Eden free of policy, but of policy choices unexamined and unsurfaced.--Mgalese 15:29, 11 March 2008 (EDT)