Optionally democratic communities

[Sir_Integra_Hellsing]

I love all of the other intents behind Aether, but I’m uncomfortable with the “always-on” democracy. I don’t think it’s a good way to organize anything, but especially not communities. I’ve been a mod of niche subreddits that got popular, and when they got popular newer users often came into conflict with the mods over what the intent of the sub should be.

I don’t think any amount of new legitimate users should be able to completely co-opt a community’s culture, especially on the internet where there’s absolutely no scarcity or impediment to simply creating a community that reflects your own goals. That’s without even going into the issues with possible artificial demographic shift, or the going viral of one community’s dispute “busing in voters” so to speak. Entryism is a serious concern in any democratic organization and it’s far too easy on a platform like this one.

I don’t want to be part of building any vision that can at the drop of a hat be changed. I’m especially concerned that my primary motive for seeking a platform like this is discussing niche topics without fear and that means smaller communities even more susceptible to the problems inherent with democracy. Can you imagine how stupid it’d be for a democracy-critical community to be co-opted by democrats?

I’d love to participate if there’s ever an update and assurance that communities that opt out upon creation won’t ever be subjected to any sort of democratic usurpation, whether of mods, goals or rules. There should be a place for the creators of a space to retain control of it, against both admins’ agendas and potentially new users’. I’ll subscribe to blog updates hoping this is added, but I can’t become a paid supporter with the platform in its current state.

[Adigo]

Mr. Sir Integra: I can only 100% agree with your view! Impeaching and related stuff only generate anarchy and “the aeternal revolution” (that is> permanent monkey-fight; a nightmare invented by Trotzky in the politics, with known catastrophic results)> The finality is chaos and atomisation for important topics/personalities and a good place for submissive, faceless sub-mediocrity. Just as in FB. Anything else will be attacked by focused subversive groups. The difference: here you cannot point on the Big-Broth - he remains in the background because he organise the “impeachment gangs” elsewhere, not inside the app. Think about Putin’s trolls, to get the idea.

The thing is: if this software have such a “start” it will NEVER embrace a solid, healthy view about communities. Is just an experiment that proves: you can shut-up the mouth of “unwanted” with the help of masses even in p2p! Impeachment agents will replace GAFA Big-Bro direct involvement. In other words, Orwell’s “Minitrue” will be enforced by the masses, not by O’Brian.

Just because permanent impeachment is not democracy. Is not even socialism. Is pure evil Trotzkism - and that have only one goal in sociology and politics: “divide et impera”. Destroy the stability.

Such applications have channels. If you are not happy with the mod, you can always open another channel with a similar topict and invite people; but for that you must WORK! You must grow your community like a garden, and ensure stability. THAT is democracy; the freedom of choice. Having channels you have already democracy but no “proletariat dictatorship”. Is that intended?? Stealing a community by impeachment was usually the specialty of bolschewiks and nazi (na-zi =national-sozialism… again sozi. Hitler used elections and impeachment…)

We have already seen the results in Discord-chat: organized activists flooded silently some channels and when they had a majority, created chaos! You can imagine what happens with added “impeachment”!

An application shouldn’t be political colored. Some basic politics and sociology neutrality-principles should be first studied, understood then respected. As well as “net-neutrality”. In this case is not even clear what kind license is used. Is-it closed and proprietary? Where are the terms on the site?..

If the creator would be responsible and democratic, he would insert this impeachment FROM THE BEGINNING as pure EXPERIMENTAL, alternative stuff. But Aether is absolutist - you have no choice, just like in the USSR. (how we could “impeach” that one? … …) The impeachment will destroy Aether on the longterm. If you get “proletariat+trolls censorship”, then is better on FB, sincerely. Serious people will migrate on other free platforms - see below.

So I conclude: this is another misshaped-born app, even if the rest could work perfectly! Petty. Is the living proof you can make a FB “censorship” even in p2p, without direct involvement of Big-Broth: it suffice to “rise” the “dark-masses” permanently in order to create a steady chaos, focused on “unwanted topics”.

Fortunately there are not only Aether and FB in this world. So, I will exercise my democratic right to choose; another p2p app, open-sourced and not impeached. There are some. Just google: Retroshare, Zeronet, Manyverse, Ring, Tox, Orbit… And I will advice my friends to do the same. Because here NOTHING WILL CHANGE- i bet my monthly salary. Once this idea floats in the air (or in the mind of the creator) you will never have the guarantee it will not be implemented later… Cheers.

[Adigo]

Okay: found the sourcecode on Github . Mea culpa. There is hope in this matter… But the problem with impeachment holds. If you are stuffed with anarchist-trotkist propaganda (as used in todays universities) you cannot have a correct bird-view about the real sociology dynamics. 2500 years ago Plato pointed on the fact that tyranny is the child of lazy, misundertood democracy. That is.

The problem of good governance is highly-complex and cannot be solved outside a point of stability and authority> in this case the founder of a “channel”. If a coder dear to believe he is better in this as all the phylosophers, historians and thinkers in the last 2500 years… well, we have another problem here.

By historians experience, the best governance (outside socialist/anarchist/nazist propaganda) is the 'king+elders" system paired with a conduct-code (10 commandments, or constitution today). Elders or counceiilors can be elected periodically (rare, that’s why elections are not everyday) to pair the central pillar which ensure consistency and stability. The number of decidents must be uneven. As bonus, having the channels you can always create fair, true democratic concurrence. Punishment must be gradual for “citisens” (like in soccer-ball; yellow flag, orange, then delete). Just culturalise please in the real-world politics and NOT in chimeras.

Yes, the citizens should have ideally a feedback method. But not to put in question the authority. This feedback can be in form of “reputation”-stars. This model was existent since ever (everybody knew even in kingdoms if a ruler is despot or good). Of course the stars are only warnings. Feedbacks. Nothing more. And must be annonymous. And of course must be refreshed by the 6-months method, because everybody can improve itself.

In the best democratic kingdom model (Belgium interbellic) the king had a veto-right against parliament decisions. Just because a politician remains …a politician (opportunist). But the founder of a garden cares about the garden. That’s how it works in the real-world. In a similar fashion the founder of a channel should have veto against any council of elected moderators. The rightneouss-society is a complicated stuff (and so, complex to code).

For sure anybody can code what he wants; that’s his democratic right. And others have the right to not use his code… Today Aether looks like a weird planet from “Little-Price” where the local personage wants his model to be enforced in the whole galaxy…

[agalati]

I’m happy to respond to us with my experience.

In my opinion,. facebook is not comparable with aether because IS NOT DECENTRALIZED and there are admins or worse artificial intelligence that censor content… IA that are guided by money! Pages that pay money to facebook can spam also to non-fans their content… but if single poor users try to spread a link to other 10 (ten) people are considered spammers! I tried to do this to spead aether and fb blocked my profile! I agree that this system (the filter bubble system) is a form of dictatorship masked as “liberty”!

Aether is different because is totally decentralized (anyone can decide who mod the content or also mod himself) and because if i’m the hoster of the content and I WILL DECIDE WHAT HOST IN MY PC!!! (aether must implement this feature to survive… or illegal trash invade the network!).

Moderation for newbie with aether (impeachment works only for newbie that have’nt had chose their moderators and its objective is only to remove illegal content from the PC of new users) also are invisible for the moderators because any moderator don’t know if it’s a moderator or not! This are good from preventing abuses. In centralized platforms if the chief abandon or threat the community, the community can’t do anything to combat this (as you told, anyone can create a new community…but this cost time and surely fragment the user base! the community must’nt pay this! I personally see many site die because of this!)

The only aim of the moderation in a healthy platform must be remove spammers, illegal content and any other threat to a community…(none want this and all mod will ban this users, indipendently from their point of view) if a mod don’t do this (but ban people that are diverging with its opinion) is’nt a good mod but a dictator! (and people must discover it without being blocked!) For this aether subs for me become “healthier” places that centralized networks…who do mess will be banned but not who have diverging opinions!)

For personal experience some years ago i used a software similar to aether called Osiris (Serverless Portal System) where there was monarchist and anarchist forums…none had problems! (also communities with hundreds of users)

[Adigo]

Sorry; you think again like a coder and not like a sociologue. There are some truths in your digression: for example the difference between p2p and centralised-incentivised . But in rest the platforms behave similary from social dynamics point of view.

A question: you say the platform is not incentivised. Okay. The trolls of Putin are not payd (outside of the app itself)??? Again the coders cannot see above/behind the code itself… sorry. The real-world is more complex. Flooding a channel in order to challenge and destroy the community have ALWAYS an interest. Is not importat if te interest is based on money or believes. The dynamics is the same.
Again: you cannot ensure stability withouth stabile continous authority. This is “anarchism” a wdespread FALLACY between young coders today.

ESPECIALLY if someone is new in a group, it shouldn’t have rights. Since ever, belonging to a group is a privilege and you must “obey internal rules” and “prove” yourself. Not the chief of the group must prove himself to you (the newling) This attitude is “challenge” and means FIGHT. The best proof is this board: because I’m new, I cannot post more than 3 responses. And this is good! I must “prove” myself first. This is natural in any community (animals or people, since ever) .

As said> Aether will sunk in a continous useless fight and serious people will trash the app. after a while.

If you don’t agree with the group is easy: make yourself one new! I said that! That is democracy and seemingly the guys living in a granted democracy are best candidates to invent DICTATORSHIPS (especially socialist-anarchist kind). Because they believe they can smash verified rules and nothing bad happens…

In one point you are FULLY RIGHT: a chief cannot “abandon” his group and especially cannot CLOSE a group. Here the issue can and MUST be solved. So if a group-founder is inactive a too long period he can be considered as “unworking”. And he cannot close a group: he must find a ruler-replacement. That’s all you must change.

The rest is illusory Trotzkist bolschewism and so anarchy. Especially a challenge from new “citizens”. This is book-trotzkism. IE: chaos. Is really book-trotzkism. Trotzky was a bolschewik from USA/Chicago. He came in Russia with a group of trained fighters (here trolls…), challeged and murdered the Tsar, and whole Russia plunged in chaos at least 25 years. …

For me isn’t important; I said that the application is doomed because of the WRONG SOCIOLOGICAL FOUNDATION. That happens when coders THINK they are better sociologues. Is just like a sociologue THINKING he is a better coder! …haaahaah… If someone wants to hear and understand is okay IF NOT is also great: myself (and others) wil search another normal-concept p2p app where they can find solidity and continuity. No problem. And anybody can code what he wants, of course!!!.. The right and freedom of choice: this is democracy after all; not the fight and challenge.

The fight of normal (un-indoctrinated ) humans was usually about “living-space”. But the channels-space is quite infinite… You can found your own “New-World”. No need for “challenges” beside wickelness, pecuniar interest (paid outside app) or ambitions. Cheers.

PS: the argument that “nothing bad happened” in “anarchist Osiris forums” is (sorry) incredibly stupid. If nothing bad happens for a while it not means it cannot.This is an incomplete design - so a BAD DESIGN. But the truth again is what I said> The freedom of choice between 2 systems. (the coders of Osiris are wise). You can implement here the same: optional monarchic and anarchic.

Ihave heard about Osiris! Just because Osiris have both: monarchic+anarchic nothing bad happens. Because the people KNOW they have a stabile alternative straight inside Osiris: so if one plays “smartass challenger” they can migrate to STABILITY. The converse is also true: a “monarch” knows his people can migrate in some anarchic gropup if he behaves bad. . As said: ALTERNATIVE and CHOICE is the foundation of democracy. And Osiris coders knew that.

One is sure: social “experimenst” are insanity. The social dynamics is "coded’ inside our DNA. somehow. Some basic rules exist and any system tend openly or hidden to comply with those “natural” rules That’s why exeriments like boschewism and anarchy are doomed from start. They will cause only suffering and pain. And even the natural state is not easy: you must accept constraints. That’s how it works.

Probably if you had only “anarchic” groups in Osiris, chaos would arise quicky just like in Discord chat.
For myself I use Zeronet - none of the problems pointed here are actual because is incredibly flexible you can even build some new model inside . Cheers.

PS to PS> French Rev was as criminal for France as the Bolschewik one for Rusia (mass-murder in souther-France…the Great terror with beheadings, 15 years of chaos. …QED.) Only the historians omitted this aspect in order to manipulate the population. And also was prepared and PAID form outside (England and Osterreich ) LEARN HISTORY! REAL HISTORY.

[agalati]

Well… facebook is a centralized platform and have an automatic system to protect users from putinian floods and fake news… but, as you can see, this system don’t work very well… (at the contrary in my opinions create only problems). As i told before, facebook isn’t a good comparison terms with aether… are totally different platforms!

If is true that the society (online or offline) is always the same… the most important difference in a “society” built in a P2P system is that none control the flow of information (and with this manage opinions!). In a P2P system you can disable a mod (elected or managed by the software) in any moment and see what he is doing. My question is very simple… this different approach can change society as we know? Aether exist to prove this… if you don’t want this you can use different software implementations with non-anarchist moderation (zeronet for example allow cloning of existing sites if a “monarch” abandon or do mess) that are here…and that must continue to exist! (none is know for now about how an anarchist society will survive in a p2p platform… maybe we wrong all and zeronet is the best alternative ) Maybe the best alternative remain the centralized web sites and social network that all we know… humanity must dare! (before French Revolution in medieval europe anyone believe that a king could be beheaded…).

In osiris monarchist and anarchist were not alternatives… a monarchist portal couldn’t become anarchist and vice-versa. In the last version of the software the distinction between monarchist and anarchist was removed and every user must choose a POV (Point of View) to have a moderation system (anyone could do the POV) in a similar way that aether works now (with the important difference that in aether, at the beginning, you don’t choose only a moderator and cannot be influenced by a malicius mod at the beginning). This decision wa taken by the devs after years of network observations to resolve the problems with monarchist cited before, as the more practical to protect portals against monarchists leaving, and to help coding (in anarchist portals was very complex and resource-consuming to calculate a vote sum for any content)