Social Control in Online Society-Advantages of Self-Regulation on the Internet

Jacob van Kokswijk
{"title":"Social Control in Online Society-Advantages of Self-Regulation on the Internet","authors":"Jacob van Kokswijk","doi":"10.1109/CW.2010.44","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Online communities are just like real worlds: control is necessary to make for a pleasant society. This does not automatically imply government or company control. In many virtual communities there has been a kind of social control for many years now that adequately maintains order in their public virtual space. Does this mean that laws are unnecessary? Some people cry out for an Internet police that must maintain public order in the cyber-Gomorrah. However, there can be order without law. Not only is legislation unnecessary for law, but law is unnecessary for order. A field study showed that as most people find the maxim 'everyone is deemed to know the law' too hard, and as the costs of procedures are so high, it is easier to fall back on common-sense norms. In this case all three functions of law-rule formation, enforcement, and dispute resolution- are asserted by means of these informal norms. And if the costs of learning and using the law are so high, then there is little use for the government to adjust the law, since citizens will ignore it anyway. Hence, these high costs become an argument for negotiating rather than the complex governmental solutions to property rights conflicts. Why then should we make (new) rules for the Internet society, if there are (too many?) rules already? Do social conventions, control and arbitration not suffice? These and similar questions arise when we look at 'life' in the online communities. Self-regulation of online communities alone is sometimes insufficient. The government will intervene in cases of serious abuse or criminal cases. A good balance between external and internal regulation can be found by having all parties involved in the chain jointly formulate regulations, in which supervision, maintaining order, dispute resolution, and misconduct are openly organized. Draconian measures, often supported by politicians out of ignorance, will however have little effect, as common sense looks for solutions in the future and legislation is based on the past. This article describes the advantages of self-regulation on the Internet and the (im)possibilities social control offers.","PeriodicalId":169421,"journal":{"name":"International Conference on Cyberworlds","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Conference on Cyberworlds","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/CW.2010.44","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Online communities are just like real worlds: control is necessary to make for a pleasant society. This does not automatically imply government or company control. In many virtual communities there has been a kind of social control for many years now that adequately maintains order in their public virtual space. Does this mean that laws are unnecessary? Some people cry out for an Internet police that must maintain public order in the cyber-Gomorrah. However, there can be order without law. Not only is legislation unnecessary for law, but law is unnecessary for order. A field study showed that as most people find the maxim 'everyone is deemed to know the law' too hard, and as the costs of procedures are so high, it is easier to fall back on common-sense norms. In this case all three functions of law-rule formation, enforcement, and dispute resolution- are asserted by means of these informal norms. And if the costs of learning and using the law are so high, then there is little use for the government to adjust the law, since citizens will ignore it anyway. Hence, these high costs become an argument for negotiating rather than the complex governmental solutions to property rights conflicts. Why then should we make (new) rules for the Internet society, if there are (too many?) rules already? Do social conventions, control and arbitration not suffice? These and similar questions arise when we look at 'life' in the online communities. Self-regulation of online communities alone is sometimes insufficient. The government will intervene in cases of serious abuse or criminal cases. A good balance between external and internal regulation can be found by having all parties involved in the chain jointly formulate regulations, in which supervision, maintaining order, dispute resolution, and misconduct are openly organized. Draconian measures, often supported by politicians out of ignorance, will however have little effect, as common sense looks for solutions in the future and legislation is based on the past. This article describes the advantages of self-regulation on the Internet and the (im)possibilities social control offers.
网络社会的社会控制——网络自我规制的优势
网络社区就像现实世界:控制是创造一个愉快社会的必要条件。这并不自动意味着政府或公司的控制。在许多虚拟社区中,多年来一直存在一种社会控制,足以维持公共虚拟空间的秩序。这是否意味着法律是不必要的?一些人呼吁网络警察必须在网络地狱中维持公共秩序。然而,没有法律也可以有秩序。不仅立法对于法律来说是不必要的,而且法律对于秩序来说也是不必要的。一项实地研究表明,由于大多数人认为“人人都被认为懂法律”这句格言太难,而且由于诉讼程序的成本如此之高,因此更容易依靠常识性规范。在这种情况下,法律的三个功能——规则的形成、执行和争端的解决——都是通过这些非正式规范来实现的。如果学习和使用法律的成本如此之高,那么政府调整法律就没什么用了,因为公民无论如何都会无视它。因此,这些高成本成为谈判的论据,而不是复杂的政府解决产权冲突的办法。既然已经有了太多的规则,我们为什么还要为互联网社会制定(新的)规则呢?社会惯例、控制和仲裁还不够吗?当我们审视网络社区中的“生活”时,就会出现这些和类似的问题。有时,仅靠网络社区的自我监管是不够的。政府将介入严重虐待案件或刑事案件。通过链上各方共同制定规则,公开组织监管、维护秩序、纠纷解决和不当行为,可以很好地平衡外部监管和内部监管。然而,由于常识寻求未来的解决方案,而立法则基于过去,往往由无知的政客支持的严厉措施将收效甚微。本文描述了互联网上自我监管的优势以及社会控制提供的(im)可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信