You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
3

[–] politicorelig 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

This can go the other way to. For example, I moderate Islam. A lot more people disagree with Islam than agree with it (hence the majority of the world are not Muslims). Imagine if there was an election on the mods of Islam and people who vehemently disagree with Islam banded together to elect one of their number as the mod there. You would end up with a page about Islam devoted to how much certain people hate Islam.

I agree the people who do not like Islam should be given a voice on the Islam subverse, but I think where pages are set up for particular interest groups allowing complete democracy could open up a bigger can of worms than we already have.

I have my issues with Reddit and I can completely understand with Cuilrunnings in that I have had the same problem. But one of the things they got right was allowing the mods to do what the mods do. The result was a natural democracy. If people agreed with the mods point of view, they subscribed and if they didn't they unsubscribed.

So with Islam, those who thought the mods were too liberal set up a rival subreddit called Islaam (seriously strict Muslims there) and those who thought they were too conservative set up the page progressive_islam and those who strongly disagreed with Islam could go to exmuslim or atheism. I think that worked best, personally, and having a complete democracy would just be inviting people to take the p*** once a year and mess up other people's subs.

Also, being really out there, if this site gets really big what's to stop a government agency deciding it needs to take control of, say, /r/politics and setting up a million robots to vote in the democracy and make sure their man always wins and they have control of whats happening here forever? That might be out there, but I don't think its beyond the realms of possibility.

0
1

[–] Cuilrunnings 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Fraud is a separate issue and can happen in any situation. Personally I'm 100% in favor of making mod logs permanently transparent. If a subverse gets to a certain size, I feel like the community should have influence over ownership. I understand what you're saying about niche subverses, and I don't want to interfere with small communities, but on larger platforms the ability to squat and control debate is way too powerful.

0
1

[–] politicorelig 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I think the most democratic thing would be to allow a rival subreddit to be set up and let people vote with their feet on who is a better mod.

Maybe though where a mod is inactive or just completely disgraceful he could be removed and a democratic election for the new mod. I agree with that for extreme cases, but I wouldn't agree with it if it became a way for a majority to silence a minority (Eg the non-Muslim majority to take over Islamic-related threads etc or even for the Muslim majority to take over minority-Muslim sect threads etc. etc. It sounds ridiculous but I bet if the opportunity were there some jokers would try to do this sort of thing)