diff --git a/literature/notes b/literature/notes
index 38c916659de0888fd716d43586c70a2f8d38b406..703391a670bfe0994dff123cbb3f16b58bfad962 100644
--- a/literature/notes
+++ b/literature/notes
@@ -1983,13 +1983,13 @@ Grounded Theory~\cite{Charmaz2006}
 "This book provides \textit{a} way of doing grounded theory" (p.9)
 
 Preface
-"At each phase of the research journey, \textit{your} reasings of your work guide your next moves."(p.xi)
+"At each phase of the research journey, \textit{your} readings of your work guide your next moves."(p.xi)
 "In short, the finished work is a construction–yours." (p.xi)
 
 Chapter 1
 "we build levels of abstraction directly from the data" (p.3)
 
-"Glaser and Strauss aimed to move qualitative inquiry beyond descriptive studies into the reals of explanatory theoretical frameworks,"(p.6)
+"Glaser and Strauss aimed to move qualitative inquiry beyond descriptive studies into the realms of explanatory theoretical frameworks,"(p.6)
 
 Criteria:
 "a completed grounded theory met the following criteria: a close fit with the data, usefulness, conceptual density, durability over time, modifiability, and explanatory power." (p.6)
diff --git a/thesis/3-Methods.tex b/thesis/3-Methods.tex
index 2a0fd8ad5a34d35aad497ebab8db13a5a8b59642..3a153f38d5ea1da9b116931fe5ede8c0c492ca5e 100644
--- a/thesis/3-Methods.tex
+++ b/thesis/3-Methods.tex
@@ -10,14 +10,6 @@ All the computations I have done and other artefacts I have used or compiled are
 And have been openly accessible since the very beginning.
 Everyone interested can follow the process and/or use the data or scripts in order to verify my computations (syn) or run their own and thus continue this research along one of the directions suggested in section~\ref{sec:further-studies} or in a completely new one.
 
-\section{Grounded Theory}
-
-I have employed some methods used by grounded theory %TODO check whether it's written with caps
-scholars, most prominently/above all their coding processes.
-There are different branches? in grounded theory that diverge slightly or more prominently.
-I followed the guidelines and .. proposed/described by Charmaz in~\cite{Charmaz2006}.
-
-
 \section{Trace Ethnography}
 
 A second important theoretical framework constitutes the trace ethnography.
@@ -41,31 +33,7 @@ They alert that via trace ethnography only that can be observed which is recorde
 The researchers also warn of possible privacy breaching through thickening traces:
 although records they use to reconstruct paths of action are all open, the thick descriptions they compile can suddenly expose a lot of information about single users which never existed in this form before and who never gave their informed consent for their data being used this way.
 
-\cite{GeiRib2011}
-Introduce the methodology (and the concept) of trace ethnography.
-
-Def
-"combines the richness of participant-observation
-with the wealth of data in logs so as to reconstruct
-patterns and practices of users in distributed
-sociotechnical systems."
-
-"exploits the proliferation of
-documents and documentary traces"
-
-"traces not only
-document events but are also used by participants
-themselves to coordinate and render accountable many
-activities"
-
-"heterogeneous data – which include transaction logs,
-version histories, institutional records, conversation
-transcripts, and source code"
-"allowing us to retroactively reconstruct specific actions
-at a fine level of granularity"
-
-"turn thin documentary traces into
-“thick descriptions” [10] of actors and events"
+\begin{comment}
 
 \cite{GeiHal2017}
 "when working with large-scale “found data” [36] of the traces
@@ -87,7 +55,6 @@ trace literacy --> get to know the community; know how to participate in it
 
 thick description of different prototypical cases:
 
-\begin{comment}
 vgl \cite{GeiHal2017}
 iterative mixed method
 combination of:
@@ -131,6 +98,184 @@ other spaces Wikipedia takes place
 - Wikimedia's office and daily work
 \end{comment}
 
+\section{Grounded Theory}
+
+Grounded theory describes a myriad/... of frameworks/... for building a scientific theory \emph{grounded} in (mostly qualitative) data analysis.
+
+Here, I haven't developed a finished theory,
+but instead just employed some methods used by grounded theory %TODO check whether it's written with caps
+scholars, most prominently/above all–their coding processes.
+There are different branches? in grounded theory that diverge slightly or more clearly/distinctly in their assumptions and proposed methods.
+I followed the guidelines and .. of constructivist grounded theory proposed/described by Charmaz in~\cite{Charmaz2006}.
+I've chosen Charmaz's interpretation of grounded theory (she speaks of ``grounded theor\emph{ies}'' and calls her own constructivist rendering of it ``\emph{a} way of doing grounded theory'') precisely because of her acknowledgement of the subjective nature of every (piece of) research which is shaped by the believes, background and theoretical understanding of the people who conduct it, who always \emph{interpret} the subject they study rather than give an exact portrayal of it:
+``we are part of the world we study and the data we collect. We \textit{construct} our grounded theories through our past and present involvements and interactions with people, perspectives, and research practices''~\cite[p.10]{Charmaz2006}
+
+She advocates for ``gathering rich–detailed and full–data and placing them in their relevant situational and social contexts''~\cite[p.10-11]{Charmaz2006} which is in line with Geiger and Ribes thick descriptions generated(syn) by trace ethnography
+\footnote{As a matter of fact, both Charmaz and Geiger and Ribes refer to ``thick descriptions'' which were coined as a term by~\cite{Geertz1973}}.
+
+Coding is a process of labeling data in an attempt to make sense of it in a systematic/orderly fashion.
+It is about seeking patterns in data and latery–trying to understand these patterns and the relationships/correlations between them.
+Above all (syn), I applied emergent coding in chapter~\ref{chap:overview-en-wiki} when trying to make sense of the tasks EN Wikipedia's edit filters are employed for.
+Key characteristic of the method are to let the codes emerge during the process contrasted to starting the process with a set of preconcieved codes.
+Scholars regard this as useful because that way the danger of trying to press data in predefined categories while potentially overlooking other, better fitting codes is reduced.
+Instead, the codes emerge/stem directly from observations of the data.
+Since coding and analysis take place simultaneously, it is also part of the process/common to come back later and re-code parts of the data with labels that have emerged (syn) later (syn) in the process.
+
+\begin{comment}
+Grounded Theory~\cite{Charmaz2006}
+Chapter 2:
+"Researchers treat extant texts \textit{as} data to address their research questions although these texts were produced for other–often very different–purposes." (p.35)
+
+additional types of data we can use:
+public records, government reports, organizational documents, mass media, literature, autobiographies, personal correspondence, Internet discussions, and earlier qualitative materials from data banks.
+
+"To the extent possible, we need to situate texts in their contexts." (p.39)
+"Where do the data come from? Who participated in shaping them? What did the authors intend? Have participants provided sufficient information for us to make a plausible interpretation? And do we have sufficient knowledge of the relevant worlds to read their words with any understanding?"(p.39)
+"Much textual analysis is without context, or worse, out of context. [...] Providing a description of the times, actors, and issues gives you a start. Multiple methods help, such as intervieweing key participants, and using several types of documents also helps." (p.39)
+
+TODO: Questions to ask of a text (p.39-40):
+"
+* How was the text produced? By whom?
+* What is the ostensible purpose of the text? Might the text serve other unstated or assumed purposes? Which ones?
+* How does the text represent what its author(s) assumed to exist? Which meanings are embedded within it? How do those meanings reflect a particular social, historica, and perhaps organizational context?
+* What is the structure of the text?
+* How does its structure shape what is said? Which categories can you discern in its structure? What can you glean from these categories? Do the categories change in sequential texts over time? How so?
+* Which contextual meanings does the text imply?
+* How does its content construct images of reality?
+* Which realities does the text claim to represent? How does it represent them?
+* What, if any, unintended information and meanings might you see in the text?
+* How is language used?
+* Which rules govern the constructuion of the text? How can you discern them in the narrative? How do these rules reflect both tacit assumptions and explicit meanings? How might they be related to other data on the same topic?
+* When and how do telling points emerge in the text?
+* What kinds of comparisons can you make between texts? Between different texts on the same topic? Similar texts at different times such as organizational annual reports? Between different authors who address the same questions?
+* Who benefits from the text? Why?
+"
+# Coding in GT
+
+"Grounded theory coding consists of at least two phases: initial and
+focused coding." (p.42)
+
+"From time to time, we may adopt our participants' telling
+terms as in vivo codes."(p.42)
+
+"During initial coding we study fragments of data-
+words, lines, segments, and incidents-closely for their analytic
+import."
+"While engaging in focused coding, we select
+what seem to be the most useful initial codes and test them against
+extensive data."(p.42)
+
+"Coding means naming segments of data with a label that simultaneously categorizes, summarizes, and accounts for each piece of data" (p.43)
+"first step in moving beyond concrete statements in the data to making analytic interpretations." (p.43)
+
+"codes stick closely to the data, show actions, and indicate how
+dilemmas surrounding disclosure arise." (p.45)
+
+"Coding is the pivotal link between collect-
+ing data and developing an emergent theory
+to explain these data." (p.46)
+
+"The logic of grounded theory coding differs from quantitative logic that
+applies preconceived categories or codes to the data."(p.46)
+
+"Language plays a crucial role"(p.46)
+"Specific use of language reflects views and values." (p.47)
+
+"Coding impels us to make our participants' language
+problematic to render an analysis of it. Coding should inspire us to examine
+hidden assumptions in our own use of language as well as that of our participants." (p.47)
+
+"we try to understand participants' views and actions from their perspectives." (p.47)
+
+Initial coding questions:
+"• 'What is this data a study of?' (Glaser, 1978: 57; Glaser & Strauss, 1967)
+• What does the data suggest? Pronounce?
+• From whose point of view?
+• What theoretical category does this specific datum indicate? (Glaser, 1978)" (p.47)
+
+"Try to see actions in each segment of data rather than applying preexisting categories to the data." (p.47)
+"Attempt to code with words that reflect action." (p.47-48)
+
+"Initial grounded theory coding can prompt you to see areas in which you lack needed data." (p.48)
+
+active coding -> use gerunds
+"We gain a strong sense of action and sequence with gerunds." (p.49)
+
+"If you ignore, gloss over, or leap beyond participants'
+meanings and actions, your grounded theory will likely reflect an outsider's,
+rather than an insider's view." (p.49)
+"Outsiders often import an alien professional lan-
+guage to describe the phenomenon." (p.49)
+
+"Make your codes fit the data
+you have rather than forcing the data to fit them." (p.49)
+
+To do while coding:
+"
+Remain open
+Stay close to the data
+Keep your codes simple and precise
+Construct short codes
+Preserve actions
+Compare data with data
+Move quickly through the data.
+"
+
+"Fresh data and line-by-line coding prompt you to remain open to the data
+and to see nuances in it"(p.50)
+
+Being critical:
+"Line-by-line coding frees you from becoming so immersed in your respon-
+dents' worldviews that you accept them without question. Then you fail to look
+at your data critically and analytically. Being critical about your data does not
+necessarily mean being critical of your research participants. Instead, being
+critical forces asking yourself questions about your data." (p. 51)
+
+in vivo codes: "codes of participants' special terms"(p.55)
+"useful analytic point of departure" (p.55)
+"preserve participants' meanings of their views and actions" (p.55)
+
+3 kinds of useful in vivo codes:
+"
+* Those general terms everyone 'knows' that flag condensed but significant
+meanings
+* A participant's innovative term that captures meanings or experience
+* Insider shorthand terms specific to a particular group that reflect their
+perspective.
+" (p.55)
+
+"Pursue telling terms" (p.57)
+
+Focused Coding:
+"using the most significant and/or frequent earlier codes to sift through large amounts of data"
+"which initial codes make the most analytic sense" (p.57)
+
+Axial Coding:
+"relates categories to subcategories, specifies the properties and dimensions of a category" (p.60)
+
+Theoretical coding:
+"Glaser (1978: 72) introduced theoretical
+codes as conceptualizing 'how the substantive codes may relate to each other
+as hypotheses to be integrated into a theory.' In short, theoretical codes specify
+possible relationships between categories you have developed in your focused
+coding."(p.63)
+
+"When your analysis indicates, use theoretical codes to help you clarify and
+sharpen your analysis but avoid imposing a forced framework on it with them."
+"interrogate yourself about whether these theoretical codes interpret all the data" (p.66)
+
+"each preconceived idea should earn
+its way into your analysis-including your own ideas from previous studies"(p.68)
+
+TODO: Check against my analysis:
+"Be careful about applying a language of intention,
+motivation, or strategies unless the data support your assertions. You cannot assume
+what is in someone' s mind-particularly if he or she does not tell you."(p.68)
+
+"Take an examined stance about whose point of view your codes reflect,"(p.69)
+
+\end{comment}
+
 \section{Cooking Data With Care}
 or Critical data science? Or both?
 
diff --git a/thesis/6-Discussion.tex b/thesis/6-Discussion.tex
index 9cba72813eed3d04ad080cbb62119a1c1ad77d37..672b6fa83cff90ac53228ffd5a683851e688d707 100644
--- a/thesis/6-Discussion.tex
+++ b/thesis/6-Discussion.tex
@@ -205,5 +205,6 @@ also
 %TODO Do edit filter managers specialize on particular types of filters (e.g. vandalism vs good faith?) -- abuse\_filter\_history table is needed for this
 
 * talk to edit filter managers (especially such who are simultaneously also bot operators)
+* talk to users who have triggered a filter (repeatedly) and their experience
 
 * What proportion of work do filters take over: compare filter hits with number of all edits and reverts via other quality control mechanisms
diff --git a/thesis/introduction.tex b/thesis/introduction.tex
index 9f4140ae5ccfaf5198b1fec3e9302ac2397aa359..e8aa802bf14a311865f163a1e44c9be9e53b258e 100644
--- a/thesis/introduction.tex
+++ b/thesis/introduction.tex
@@ -15,6 +15,10 @@ Another candidate for an opening quote:
 \cite{Geiger2014}
 "Bots aren’t usually part of some master plan – if they were, they probably wouldn’t be bots."
 -- Wikipedia is a system run by volunteers which has grown organically. Stuff is often implemented the way it is because somebody was good at this particular technology and felt like doing it at the precise moment.
+
+\cite{Charmaz2006}
+"At each phase of the research journey, \textit{your} reasings of your work guide your next moves."(p.xi)
+"In short, the finished work is a construction–yours." (p.xi)
 \end{comment}
 
 ``Code 2.0 TO WIKIPEDIA, THE ONE SURPRISE THAT TEACHES MORE THAN EVERYTHING HERE.'' reads one of the inscriptions of Lawrence Lessig's ``Code Version 2.0'' (p.v)~\cite{Lessig2006}.
diff --git a/thesis/references.bib b/thesis/references.bib
index 38f338821078685990d93b773cbc58293dcd4ada..e567370f48a2d6a4ce0c12f93d0bed288e4ab099 100644
--- a/thesis/references.bib
+++ b/thesis/references.bib
@@ -37,6 +37,13 @@
   note = {\url{http://www.stuartgeiger.com/writing-up-wikisym.pdf}}
 }
 
+@misc{Geertz1973,
+  title = {Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture},
+  author = {Geertz, Clifford},
+  year = {1973},
+  publisher = {Basic Books}
+}
+
 @inproceedings{Geiger2009,
   title = {The social roles of bots and assisted editing programs},
   author = {Geiger, R Stuart},