The internet makes massive on-line collaboration technically feasible but culturally challenging.
- No location available
- coordination, culture, decentralization, collaboration,

A fundamental obstacle to scaling collective intelligence is that claimed benefit is vague and uncertain and this by itself does not provide enough motivation for most people to participate. While there are civic minded people who will contribute for social good, when the initiative depends solely on civic altruism it will struggle to scale beyond the core of committed activists and stakeholders. Initiatives are literally competing with cat gifs for people’s free time.
- No location available
-

This ‘social architecture’ of massive on-line collaboration is a whole area of research and practice in its own right, much broader than can be covered here. The best guides I've encountered for social architecture of large scale communities are Chapter 6 of the ZeroMQ Guide and the related Chapter 3 of Culture and Empire by the same author, the classic The Cathedral and The Bazaar, and Yochai Benkler’s work
- No location available
-

The paradox is that tight-knit communities are fundamentally more inclined to maintain agreement than explore disagreement. For debate-mapping to work in the context of a tight-knit community, the community must also invest in fostering a culture of respectful disagreement alongside any formal process.
- No location available
-
- [note::This might be the largest obstacle for introducing collective sense-making projects in the animal welfare space, given how divided the movement has been in past (i.e. abolitionism v.s. welfarism)]