The Blueprint
The Rulebook

A small moderator team. A jury has the final word.

Nobody, including the moderator team, can unilaterally remove hate speech, threats, doxxing, or illegal content: those always go to a randomly drawn jury of citizens, no exceptions. Moderators are appointed publicly, never anonymous, and handle only the everyday case, spam and flooding, so jury time goes to the calls that actually need judgement. The rules themselves can be challenged through the Blueprint, like any other policy.

How it works

  1. An automated filter screens every submission for the clearest violations only. Anything it flags is hidden, not deleted. Spam goes to the moderator queue for a quick call; hate speech, threats, doxxing, and illegal content go straight to a jury instead.
  2. Any citizen can report content against a specific rule. Five reports from five different citizens hide it pending review. Reported spam goes to a moderator; the four serious categories always go to a jury instead. It never vanishes silently.
  3. For anything serious, a panel of citizens is drawn at random: never the submitter, never a reporter, never anyone who has served three times in the past month. Jurors see the content and the rule, not the author. Majority decides: keep, remove, or escalate to a fresh panel. No moderator can shortcut this.
  4. Panels dissolve the moment a case is decided. Only the vote tally is kept, never who voted which way. The moderator team is small and named, appointed by the site’s founder, and every decision they make is logged.
  5. One appeal per removal, decided by a completely fresh jury, whether the original removal came from a jury or a moderator. No single person can override that jury, in either direction.

Disagree with a rule?

The rulebook is a Tier Two document. Propose a change on the Blueprint, argue your case, and if it crosses its threshold the rulebook gets a new version, the same process as changing tax policy.

Propose a change