Quote from: Solosanz on July 14, 2024, 09:37:14 AM

Having a social media without one intermediary could cause a disaster, even theymos really want to make the forum as decentralized as possible, but this forum we have few moderators who ban and delete users post. That's a good thing because there are a lot shitpost need to be deleted.

I think there can be moderation without intermediaries in the financial sense. The Steem(it) project had some interesting mechanisms in place, even if the project in general was far from perfect and is now almost dead. There were basically two layers of moderation: one the voting system inside the blockchain app, and the other one were interventions by the frontend operators (in the case of Steem, the operator of the Steemit web frontend, but also mobile apps are possible of course) if they felt the voting system was being "gamed" by a malicious group.

An example: If we had a Nostr-based or blockchain-based social media network where operators can set up web frontends to make using it as easy as X or Facebook, then this frontend operator could restrict content if a shill army is voting up illegal/offensive or advertising/spam content. The base system would still be decentralized and uncensored, but there would be thus ways to deal with these problems.

Of course centralized SocialFi projects can be seen as intermediaries too. If you have a 50% premine, then it's approximately the same than every interaction (be it Tap to earn, post to earn like in Steem(it), ad systems or whatever) being charged with a 50% fee benefitting the founders. Grin

I'm of course aware that many of the threads of this style are created with a commercial goal. But an early "intervention" could in theory lead to interesting discussions. Wink

(Of course, if a shill army already has hijacked the thread then it's better to not bother and led the thread die).