Experimental thought, but something I want to do in near future.
Basically admins and mods are selected sortitionally( randomly) from people who apply.
All admins and mods have fixed term limits.
Existence of Mod or Admin trials where a public chat(court) decides consequences for their actions, if they misbehave, could lead to
Ever since I learnt about the sortition system, I was incredibly curious how it would work irl, hence this idea.
Look, I am not going to claim this is a solution to anything, till ones actually up and running I think it’s hard to say which direction it will go. But still, I want your opinion on it.
On How to encourage people to mod a community?
By making mod duty easy for them, have small term limits, and in those term limits they only have to work for 4/3 days a week. Term could be just few weeks. Also get lot more mods and give them specific time slots beyond which they are vastly not needed unless an emergency.
It’s a fun idea and there’s similar ideas, but in the end, someone always has to be in the contract of the server provider or host the infrastructure at home and is basically the admin overlord. That person is also liable if illegal stuff shows up.
I think that’s why wording mentions friends not a public service
I’m trying to think how you could set up a charter, like through a corporation. Or partnership, might be a way to legally rotate who holds the liability. Basically, rotate the C suite and board of directors every time the effective ownership/control of the instance changes. Probably have to do some filings, but since it’s not publicly traded those filings just need to be with your accountant?
NOTE I am two vodkas and three joints deep this is probably bad advice
No I think that’s the best way to do it. Strongly depends on the country you’re in, what kind of legal constructs it allows, but having some organization that’s in the contract instead of some person is the way to go. That org can then handle votings etc (can even use the instance for that).
I am completely sober but the Idea I got is more insane than yours.
The trust thing basically cannot work for me. It’s not only expensive, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to operate a social media trust from my jurisdiction( India ). So if anyone wants to go forward with trusts, it must be someone from Europe not me.
The idea I have, which honestly sounds crazy, but may be the only way individual owners can run these instances, is the idea of mutually assured destruction. Basically, why, despite having nukes, have we not used them yet? Because nuclear attack means both the partners will mutually assured destruction.
Similarly, if I give admins and server owner both the power to delete the server, with admins having to vote a simple majority in order to do so, it basically creates a mutually assured destruction scenario, where both have to co-operate.
Similarly, if I give admins and server owner both the power to delete the server, with admins having to vote a simple majority in order to do so, it basically creates a mutually assured destruction scenario, where both have to co-operate.
if you were an instance owner you would also want to run that by your lawyer. i’m not a lawyer but i have not had coffee and i can see four different scenarios that having a killswitch like that would get you in neck deep shit. stuff like willful and premeditated destruction of evidence, depending on the severity, blah blah blah. short version, everyone i work with works in pen, not pencil. not because we’re that good (we are) but because if we need to remove something from any records, you (generally) do it by amending the record to show the correction, not deleting the error.
Hinges on the fact that server is run on donations, so admin has an incentive to not run the server against the idea.
I know, the hosters sanity and goodwill is still doing a lot of heavy lifting. I must think through this better.
Oh hey, we had one of those once… !simdemocracy@lemmy.world
You can just form a regular institutionalized user group / hobby association and run that this way if you want.
That’s the end point I see for the fediverse too, localized specialized interest groups that run themselves, know each other IRL and both finance the space because they see the value it brings them and democratically decide how to run it.
… but it doesn’t work perfectly with sign ups being unlimited, anonymized and open to the general internet.
cosocial.ca Mastodon instance worka like this
Also seems to be growing organically unlike the rest of mastodon . codeberg is also democratic and grows organically as indicated by donations.
There is some evidence this model could be beneficial. there is some research about the benefits of credit unions and housing cooperative which is also indirect evidence iirc.
I’m curious, can’t wait to see how it goes!
Quite a stupid idea honestly. You seem to not understand that someone needs to host the infrastructure that an instance runs on. So what you are saying is: give the admin rights to a server that someone pays money for, to some other person every few weeks. This just does not work.
Aren’t most instances on lemmy running on donations? While I absolutely understand your point, because of this I don’t think the hoster will have a veto unless they are the one funding it from their pockets
Someone has to make the actual contract with a hosting provider, unless there is a separate legal entity for this (e.g. Fediverse Foundation for feddit.org). Thus, someone needs to have skin in the game. I doubt someone would easily hand off the instance he/she is responsible for to a third party. At least I wouldn’t.
Fair point.
I think the scope of the idea is the service itself, not the hosting part. So the rotation would be for those who set sidebar, not those who deploy
Don’t be a dick.
It’s possible but will be very easy to manipulate by people making alts and sockpuppets. You’d need a way to verify individuals.
The Fediverse Anarchist Flotilla is already experimenting with this sort of radical democracy, through our regular governance threads and our radical admin recalls but we have to rely on paid supporters and individually vouched people to stave manipulation.
Anyway, people can already repurpose the threativore which is the bot that enables this voting to handle the extra stuff you suggest and give it a try.
Thanks! You’re an instance admin too I believe. Yes the idea is very close to anarchism, but Athens used sortition on top of it for day to day work.
Do you think the admin recalls and governance threads are working well, and haven’t been abused? Also I don’t find the fediverse instance you said, is it the same as dbzer0?
The FAF is a confederation of instances which ultimately act as one. /0 is one of them yes.
Until now our democracy seems to be working well.
Gives me confidence!
So, someone pointed out, there’s always someone who’s paying for the server costs and they might not like paying for instance someone else is running, what would be your take on that? Is there a way to tackle that issue?
That’s what the FAF is for. We have multiple instances with the same admins, rules, defederations etc to hedge against rogue sysadmins.
Thanks. I’ll think over everything you said. It does look like my instance could be eligible as a companion instance if executed well enough. Regarding alt accounts, I feel one must at least contribute somewhere on the instance to participate… Yeah it’s gonna be a tough problem to crack, and also the one other user pointed out, about funding. For an initial period I may run the pilot project, but when admins themselves aren’t stable, it’s going to create some problems.
Thanks for your feedback. I’ll think over it
Hah, lemmy.world would never choose to join the faf. In any case we only accept anarchist instances as we are supposed to share rules
Democracy is when people pay to gain the right to vote
Cryptographic IDs? Doesn’t work for everyone in the voting process but it could be a useful way to make sure mod x is whintheybsay they are
Yeah idea may sound stupid to some, but is it a question not worth pondering over?
Would a blockchain be better for a voting system?
The thing is nobody wants to be a mod in here. 100% of those who apply are taken
I like it, at least as an experiment. Can’t hurt to try.
The randomness of mod assignment could be a good thing. A mod with no subject matter expertise (real or imagined) would be less likely to be biased by their personal opinion.
Yup! Exactly the argument I have heard from people who back the system.
I have also been wondering about this. But
admins and mods are selected sortitionally( randomly) from people who apply
That’s your point of starvation. The application
I think, instead, everyone on the instance should be a voting member. And the decisions should be taken based on some requirement on the votes
- person one flags a post -> that’s a vote
- maybe add a header that this post is under review? The voting process should probably be taking some time
- another person flags the same post -> that’s a vote
- someone else says it should not be flagged -> that’s a vote in opposite direction
- ??? <- can be changed by an instance wide vote too
- post/comment/user is either moderated or not, depending on votes and logic from the previous vote
In order to boost participation, randomly ask an active account to cast a vote on an ongoing discussion
I think there should be some way for “backend admin” to step in and ban something. But they should only do that for spam/csam/scam/etc. Nothing else, no matter how crazy or rude the take is
(btw, maybe the instance could also normalize asking someone to reword their take if it’s rude or can be interpreted badly out of context?)Hm, so voting would be a system similar to up- and downvoting, except only activated when somebody flags a post?
Application is important because applying means you’re motivated enough to take the role. Also limiting to people who have an account in the instance.
And yes, you bring a good point, random people can and should participate in it.
Csam was the true bane, and while cloudflare does have some protection, I am actively looking for better ways, even thinking of using qwen or deepseek v4 for specifically that. Except with open weight models it’s not just the model but who’s hosting it that’s also something one must take into consideration.
I believe admins would be good enough for spam, csam and scam stuff, let’s see though how it works out first
I’m afraid that with applications it would end up with the same situation we have now. 2-3 people per instance
For sure only local accounts should have voting rights
Well, bringing down the level of commitment required for being an admin or mod may increase the number of applicants, though if it’s enough to sustain the idea is something I don’t think I have an answer for.
Cloudflare actually stopped their service. If you come up with another let us know
Cloudflare actually stopped their service
what?
I would not join. This type of thing is nice a laugh but I don’t have the time to do the work. So Im a leech on the hard work of others. I hope those others understand my life situation that has me leeching but I get others have even more challenging situations. Oh wait. Who apply. Not everyone? that is not athenian democracy is it?
Athen democracy did have a system where you had to consent to standing in the process. I mean isn’t that necessary? You only stand if you want to stand.
Also it’s not being a leech, one of the biggest success of their democracy was to ensure people working for government get a salary. Without a paid incentive I think plenty of people would just not participate in it at all.
My upper estimate is half of the dau might want to participate, realistically, I think number could be as low as 30 or 20%
Oh wow. I always though it was everyone. This is even a bit more concerning to me because its like the pool is people who want to do it but not to the extent to like make and nurture a community. I mean in some ways the fediverse is the ultimate democracy as anyone can make their own instance or community. As long as they are willing to put in the time they can do it.
Make it! Fork Piefed/lemmy and get it setup. Why not, might be fun.
Still needs an instance owner who is legally responsible for all the content on the entire site - this way the police know who to come for if there is illegal content like CSAM. At that point, better make sure that the admins are trustworthy individuals who have been vetted more extensively than simply having applied.
But sounds a great way to engender a sense of ownership among mods (& perhaps those admins who were vetted).
Btw PieFed also has several features that implement democratization of moderation, lessening the work that a mod traditionally is forced to do on Lemmy since the end-users can do the thing on their own, aided with software. e.g. if someone wants to see less content about Musk or Trump, then keyword filters provide that option (All, Some, or None), rather than a moderator having to decide for all of the community members at once. Or if someone wants to avoid contentious content, they can hide or just collapse (requiring an extra click to read) comments below a certain (user-definable) score threshold. Or NSFW content can be blurred, rather than simply allowed vs. removed; also NSFW is distinguished from NSFL (gore). Also fwiw, moderator reports federate, and someone is actually notified if their content is removed or if they are banned, plus much more - PieFed already allows much more democratic processes than the more authoritarian-styled Lemmy provides for (I believe there is even a deeper description of administrative roles built right in). So you may want to read about that. See also this article.
However it is accomplished, it sounds like a grand experiment!
Csam is gonna be the ultimate hurdle I am gonna have to cross. Lot of traditional csam protections involve protection against already existing images on the internet, and even those software are becoming sparser these days.
The world is a less friendly place than it used to be… especially the interwebs.
