a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment
aidrocsid  ·  3427 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: The social aggregator is a terrible business model.

Awesome! That's good to hear!

I'd definitely make sure to set some controls in your charter that limit the changes able to be made by future admins down the road. You don't want some future iteration of your staff to up and decide to take over and monetize or give some advertisers special treatment in exchange for some money on the side.

What you've already done with sharing and filtering basically puts users into a system where they're encouraged to act in a certain way. If you can find a way to extend something like that to future administrators, you could have your hands on something that it's really hard to corrupt.

I guess the first thing you've got to do in that case is ask yourself what admins are capable of or might be capable of in the future and what they should be capable of to keep the site healthy, the users content, and the ball rolling. Then you've got to cement that philosophy into place in your charter and make it either impossible or incredibly difficult to change.

Is it possible to make a charter for a non-profit that's legally binding? Barring that, maybe some oversight can be put into place that has the authority to remove admins who disregard the charter? Say you get tired of administrating hubski a few years from now and pass the torch on to someone else. Well, instead of actually completely passing the torch you can give over the every-day functioning of the site and what not but retain control passively simply in case of an emergency situation where the charter has been ignored and you need to change things back to normal.

This situation, of course, assumes that you won't sell the site a few years down the road for a huge sum of money. I'm not really sure of a contingency for that.

A legally binding charter, if that's even possible, would be the ideal solution I'd think.