Community dynamics is incredibly hard, managing it under growth and after a certain threshold even more so, and radical change is almost impossible. It's easy

Community dynamics is incredibly hard, managing it under growth and after a certain threshold even more so, and radical change is almost impossible. It's easy to say that someone has been too lax or too firm but it's such a complex issue. It's really hard to force a community in certain direction. It's more about sowing the seeds with tools and ux and less about policies and rules... and then apply a light touch help it develop in the direction you want. There's also a question of what the ultimate goal is. What's best for the most users? For making the most money? The biggest median satisfaction? To fulfill some aspirational teneth? I think one of Reddit's fundamental problems at this size is that it is grown on the seeds of anonymity, user moderators and upvotes/downvotes. It has served them well for a long time but chaos always ensues when a community reaches a certain threshold, and more pressure needs to be applied to keep it in check (if that's what you want) Upvotes/Downvotes is a blunt tool and threads easily changes into who agrees with whom rather than promoting thoughtful comments. User anonymity is great, but requires features around it at a certain size. A country has borders to keep criminals away and community needs a way to keep trolls at bay. If you just can create another account what's the problem with being a troll? One remedy might be a smarter karma system where more visibility is given to users that's posted interesting content, kinda lika slashdot. User moderators are great when it works, like in some channels. But it's also a source of petty power struggles and dictators defending their fiefdoms. Reddit of course benefits tremendously from the work the "power" incentivizes these moderators do for free, but I keep wondering if at a certain size there needs to be more automation and checks and balances to avoid user moderators becoming destructive or slanted and put too much focus on the meta. Then again maybe some subreddits should be biased and let the mods rule as their will. It's a little weird though for big general subreddits for things like news and countries. Anyway, Reddit is probably too much set in it's way to enact radical change without the users revolting, and there isn't proof that the model doesn't work, just that it has its problem, as all models probably would. As I said, community dynamics are complicated. Will be interesting to follow Reddit going forward.