I think this has a lot to do with the platforms vs. publishers issue, and the Section 230 dustup we're about to see. IMO any platform whose owners have enough

I think this has a lot to do with the platforms vs. publishers issue, and the Section 230 dustup we're about to see. IMO any platform whose owners have enough editorial control for these engagment-hacking techniques to be useful (the ability to decide what gets seen, what doesn't, and who sees what) should be treated as a publisher, not a platform. This doesn't have to kill online communities generally. As long as we can distinguish between editorial control and freedom of association (i.e. the ability to ban rule-breakers and people we don't like) I don't see why effective moderation wouldn't be possible.