April 20th, 2020 at 3:48 PM
So I've long had an idea (for years, as a matter of fact). One that I would never be able to pull off, but I'm going to share the idea here. Maybe someone can make it happen some day.
It's called the anarchy forum, but believe me, it's not without order. Rather, the order, structure, and heirarchy come entirely from the members/community. It is self organized, self staffed, and self managed.
It's self managed.
It would be built entirely around the reputation system. Users with a large amount of reputation would gain extra powers on the forum for moderation, etc. Users with the most reputation out of all members would become the administrators. There would be policies and restrictions in place, of course. New users would not be able to down-rep, and there would be people responsible for making sure that clone accounts, etc. were banned.
The site ownership would be almost non-existant and anonymous. Administation would be done almost entirely by members who have gained the most reputation. Likewise, they could be overthrown if, by community vote, someone else is put in charge. In other words, the community would be entirely managed ONLY by the most respected members of the community at any given time.
That being said, there would be a global admin account that would be managed by a few people (and certainly the person managing the server as well), and that admin account would (anonymously) deal with any situations where illegal content gets posted or policies are violated. This account would never post, but would act anonymously to moderate the forum against anything that the community doesn't self-moderate.
The concern is that it would probably wind up along the lines of the 2B2T minecraft server (a server where there are no rules). Ideally, the goal would be to absolutely establish normal rules and order, but to have it self-established. Instead of the administration running everything, the community runs it. In practice, there would have to be restrictions and policies in place, and there would have to be at least some administration outside of the community-centered model. It would never work otherwise.
Nevertheless, it's a unique idea. I've never seen this done in practice before. Maybe someday, it will become a reality.
It's called the anarchy forum, but believe me, it's not without order. Rather, the order, structure, and heirarchy come entirely from the members/community. It is self organized, self staffed, and self managed.
It's self managed.
It would be built entirely around the reputation system. Users with a large amount of reputation would gain extra powers on the forum for moderation, etc. Users with the most reputation out of all members would become the administrators. There would be policies and restrictions in place, of course. New users would not be able to down-rep, and there would be people responsible for making sure that clone accounts, etc. were banned.
The site ownership would be almost non-existant and anonymous. Administation would be done almost entirely by members who have gained the most reputation. Likewise, they could be overthrown if, by community vote, someone else is put in charge. In other words, the community would be entirely managed ONLY by the most respected members of the community at any given time.
That being said, there would be a global admin account that would be managed by a few people (and certainly the person managing the server as well), and that admin account would (anonymously) deal with any situations where illegal content gets posted or policies are violated. This account would never post, but would act anonymously to moderate the forum against anything that the community doesn't self-moderate.
The concern is that it would probably wind up along the lines of the 2B2T minecraft server (a server where there are no rules). Ideally, the goal would be to absolutely establish normal rules and order, but to have it self-established. Instead of the administration running everything, the community runs it. In practice, there would have to be restrictions and policies in place, and there would have to be at least some administration outside of the community-centered model. It would never work otherwise.
Nevertheless, it's a unique idea. I've never seen this done in practice before. Maybe someday, it will become a reality.
