Earlier this week, I shared a bit about my experience on a jury, and reflected on how this collection of peer-review steps had similar and disparate elements of scholarly peer-review. In this talk by Clay Shirky, both scholarly peer-review and jury trials are described as forms of argument, and ones that actually made the arguments work toward an outcome. Shirky then reflects on how the Internet is full of arguments, but rarely are the arguments productive — except in the world of Github, a legacy of Linux and perhaps a new way of arguing cooperatively. A very interesting talk, as usual.

Enjoy!