A sensible way to run a website dedicated to debate about India's national security affairs
I have been thinking about this issue after exchanges with several of my readers on the last thread.Presently, we are confronting the aftermath of a terrible moderation failure inside the forum. However in the context of discussions on the moderation failure, a number of issues have come out - pertaining to the role of politics, to the role of the "original conception" of the website, and the addictive nature of power - just to name a few.
Though I confess my heart is heavy after this episode and I feel a lot of my own dreams about the forum and website have been crushed - I would like to have something positive come from this mess.
Needless to say - these are my views - not those of anyone I may or may not know.
To begin - the problems we are seeing are the direct result of a lust for power. Power corrupts, it removes the sense of balance that keeps personal ambition in check. In order to run a website like this - one must create instutional safeguards against power lust.
A relatively simple scheme to guard against this tendency is to have a single fixed time period for forum administrators. The knowledge that the stay in a position of power is a limited one time affair, will deter abuse.
While this places great pressure on the system to select new moderators, there is a way to mitigate this. If one creates a tenure scheme by which any poster who has posted for longer than a certain number of years, and has made certain (significant) contributions to the website in the form of publications, organisation etc... will automatically be up for promotion to moderator rank.
Once such a poster has accepted moderator rank - they will be bound by a rigid code of conduct which will cover their public utterances on political, sectarian and ethnic issues. The power of such moderators will be clearly defined and administrative actions will have to fit a transparent format. A transparently moderated debate will eliminate the need for special management procedures that have hitherto been in vogue.
The next question is - what will happen to the old moderators and founding fathers?
I propose that the founding fathers form a board of governors. A governing board like this could focus on the development of the wider interests of the website. Barring extreme situations, there would be no reason for the members of the board to intervene in the running of the website or the forum though they would be free to contribute in any way of their choosing as ordinary members. If the founding fathers can remain on the forum as ordinary members - then surely the newest of the newbies will learn a great lesson in humility - a lesson they will carry forth into their stay as moderators.
I suggest that upon retirement the former moderators and site administrators (if they so choose) be invited to stay on the forum as ordinary members. Having renounced their moderator rank - they would be free of the burden that it carries. Their presence on the forum, would effectively create a large local pool of knowledge and enrich the collegiate atmosphere necessary to mentor newer and younger members joining the forum.
With adequate mentorship and moderation - I do not see why such an experiment would not succeed in producing a vibrant environment for sensible debate on India's national security issues.