Moderation

[auryn-macmillan]

Should forums be moderated, if so how and by who?

[ghost]

Moderation in a DAO's central communication network is tantamount to sitting 'on the board', so to speak. It has massive potential for abuse, external manipulation, and just general power tripping. I've been a part of forums online whose moderators have become tyrannical over truly mundane subjects - I can only imagine what could happen when someone like that is moderating a $10 million fund...

That being said I think some degree of moderation could be necessary. Perhaps we could set it up so moderators can be voted in for an unlimited amount of non-consecutive terms? Sort of like the UN security council. It's a bit of a novel idea but a DAO is a novel concept. By constantly shifting the moderation team you avoid having too much influence accumulate within a small subgroup, but because there is no limit on the amount of times one individual can be a mod, eventually you'll have a couple dozen people with a solid moderation history who will be taking on the role at different times.

I could also just be overthinking this :p

[auryn-macmillan]

The idea of constantly rotating non-consecutive terms sounds interesting. I think I would lean more toward a liquid democracy type setup. No need to remove moderators that are performing well/to the community's expectations.

[matrixator]

If we have moderators, than we need some basic terms and conditions to serve as basis for the moderator's decisions.

[auryn-macmillan]

In a liquid democracy, you don't need necessarily need to have a "constitution" as such built in. Rather, you would let the mods define how they will and wont treat particular situations, and they would be voted in or out based on their platform and performance/adherence to their platform/adherence to the will of the crowd.