{"word_count": 204, "character_count": 1443}
Researchers:  Struggles with getting credited for the nature of participatory engagement work - to be recognized as scholarly output  Lack of training to organize a participatory engagement project, managing and mediating focus groups  Experts and Specialists feel threatened by being placed at the same level as the “non-academic”; undermining of authority, quality of competencies (i.e Wikipedia → expert participation was low at the beginning. Not the case so much today)Cultural Institutions:  Curators, Experts, and Specialists feel threatened by being placed at the same level as the “non-academic”; undermining of authority, quality of competencies Web: Role: a carrier of knowledge and communication; the medium in which we work Example: Letters 1916 - interactive visualizations for a large corpus. Difficult to do the visualizations in real time. The visualizations takes time (90 second lag), resource heavy. Ideal goal: Use the visualization for discovery Vandalism/Abuse/Desecration within the project (considerable risk factor) → contributing users writing malicious content, hacking with nefarious intentions. Question of management and project design. Natural Language Processing to combat internet trolls  Research Infrastructures: How does the RI get accredited for the participatory work they do (i.e. bringing people together and facilitating knowledge exchange)? If there is no participation how can RI exist and survive? 