# An Organizational and Governance Model to Support Mass Collaborative Learning Initiatives
## 2 A Brief Overview of Related Work
Citizendium [18] is another example in which volunteer contributors take part in an open wiki project to dedicate themselves to creating a free, comprehensive, and reliable repository of structured knowledge under gentle expert oversight. Recently, a few studies [5; 19] have attempted to find how such mass collaborative environments are built up, coordinated, and developed. Some studies, such as [20], highlight the need for more clarification on the main processes and functions that should be considered in mass collaborative projects. It is essential to have a strong and common understanding of the principles that drive a large number of individuals to work collectively and achieve things that were previously unimaginable. Moreover, it is important to identify the unique characteristics and main features that set MC apart from other kinds of collective actions. With the intention of obtaining a better overview of these issues, we developed an analysis of some representative cases of MC. For that, 15 case studies of MC from different contexts are identified and their positive and negative factors are then listed in the following. These factors are identified and assessed from the MCL point of view and are used for the purpose of community learning in MCL initiatives:  
* Wikipedia--a web-based, free-content, and Internet-based encyclopedia written and maintained by a community of volunteer editors in which users can freely share their knowledge [21]:
* _Positive factors_--it is free and contributed by volunteers. It is open access and easy inclusion, and anyone can participate. Users can play different roles and perform different tasks. It has no power hierarchy. Users are treated (almost) equally. Articles are continuously developed, updated, and checked. Consensus can be reached through friendly and open discussion. * _Negative factors_--Wikipedia editors are anonymous. The quantity or frequency of contributions is not controlled. Not all content will be accurate. The scientific level of articles varies. Contents are not free from bias. Anyone can vandalize the articles. Some users might have fake credentials. * Digge--a social news website that enables users to submit their interesting stories to be selected and voted (\"Digg\" or \"Bury\") by other users [22; 23]:
* _Positive factors_--it is a user-driven website, and it is open to anybody. It has easy inclusion. the login is mandatory, and users need to create a Digg user account. Users are volunteers and they can play different roles and participate in different tasks. Users can add friends and develop their relationships. Users' information and contributions are associated with their Digg profile. Stories are classified into different groups based on topics; good stories will be promoted. Contents are checked by the system. Digg raises capital from investors. * _Negative factors_--there is no editorial control on submissions. An influential group of users can affect information credibility by using promotions, burying information, and votes. Users cannot share their opinions because Digg lacks commenting features on the website. * Yahoo! Answers--this was a Q&A platform or knowledge market that allowed users to ask questions on any topic and/or answer others' questions by sharing facts, opinions, and experiences [24] (Yahoo! Answers was shut down on 4 May 2021):
* _Positive factors_--it was an open learning community, available in 12 languages, and open to all. Users could connect, share info, add comments, ask questions, answer others' questions, and/or vote. There were some categories with multiple sub-categories for organizing questions. There was a \"Point System\" (scoring) and a \"Voting System\". Users could receive a \"badge\" under their name, e.g., naming them as a \"Top Contributor\". Staff could reach different levels of authority and site access. Supportive users were featured on the Yahoo! Answers Blog. The \"user moderation system\" handled its misuses. Posts could be detached if they received a sufficient negative weight.