- 6.5Long term feedback: For long term health of a community board, it is essential that the board have multiple mods. A long term solution to provide for this would be to allow a method for a board to be controlled by a multisig of some fashion. Obviously very, very low priority, but something to think about.
5 comments
Date
-
Bad idea. Sounds like you want censorship under the guise of 'long term health' if you disagree with what is being written.
-
I don’t thinks it’s so much about censorship as it is sharing the load. There is inevitably going to be spammers and scammers. And someone needs to be there to take out the trash. But your concerns are not empty. It is worth pointing out that nothing here can be deleted, only hidden by the mods. And allowing for delegation of mod duties may become important unless there exists a flawless system of weeding out the bad from the good. Not saying there isn’t but even reddit is just too easy to manipulate.
-
>>3GRPENRFXQ It is not just about sharing the load but also making it more decentralized and long lasting. To the extent there is ANY modding at all, a board controlled by 1 is a dictatorship. A board with multiple mods spreads control. You could also create certain multisig thresholds for actions such that you cannot have a rogue mod. Finally, I'm thinking about it from the perspective that if a board is controlled only by one person, and they leave the space, die, or otherwise become unavailable, then the board would be completely unattended.
-
I think in the long run, the board contracts will have to be more robust and support features like: - Multiple owners/moderators - More fine-grained permissions, at least a distinction between moderators and board owners who can change configurations and add/remove moderators - Some form of banning or whitelist/blacklist for posting - Control over parameters such as cost for posting or need to stake tokens to create a post - Moderating multiple posts in a single transaction Given the right tools, each community should be able to self-organize and find the right balance. I think there needs to be some form of content curation to prevent abuse, but I wouldn't say it is censorship, since everything, including moderation decisions would be transparent and visible on the blockchain.
-
>>ULSEW4FHVQ The case of board owners going rogue/disappearing/losing their keys is interesting. We could implement some mechanism for the community to claw back ownership of a board, but would have to think carefully about how to do this (maybe through vote by token holders?). I want to avoid exposing some "superadmin" power as much as possible because I see independent/decentralized boards as one of the main value propositions for the platform.