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.
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
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.
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.
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).
Noooo high me is supposed to give bad advice I have trained him that way. I woke up and am sober (wrll, for me) and am so disappointed in him