I know I'm new, so that means I'm not very familiar with your community. And I posted this before, but this seems like a better place to discuss this. So feel free to tell me to bug off or mute me, but here's my thoughts:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/15/you-must-blow-reddit-up-to-save-it.html

After reading the linked article, I've been questioning whether a corporate startup environment is the right way to handle an online marketplace of ideas and discussion. There will always be the Imgurs and 9Gags out there to share pictures (shoutout to Plag and their fantastic app I found recently). But for larger and longer discussion that can give voice to the tired, the poor, the huddled masses maybe a different structure is needed.

I know, that's blasphemy in today's Silicon Valley or Wall Street, but maybe that's part of the problem. Basing a community on the foundation of shifting sands that is VC funding is maybe part of the problem? Haven't corporate interests shown that most people can be bought eventually? An old corporate negotiating tactic is to invite the leaders of the opposition to your ivory tower and treat them like equals. Pretty soon they start to identify with you rather than who they're supposed to be representing and you get whatever you wanted. Slashdot, Digg, SourceForge, and now Reddit seem like they were bought out that way.

So, respectfully I offer my two ideas about what may work:

Mutual Organization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_organization Pros: This is funded by members who are customers. Extra funds can be used to invest with and be at least partially self-funded. Perhaps at $5/yr it would cover costs and have extra to drive growth and investments to maybe lower costs or offer rewards/dividends. VC funding could be used to start with the understanding that they then would be bought out when investments start to roll in. Cons: This does not preclude people being elected into powerful positions and then being more interested in squeezing the most money out of members for their own pay/bonuses. VC is always a mixed bag. Sometimes filled with angry cats.

Cooperative (perhaps Consumer or New Generation): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative Pros: Could be non-profit and able to be a little above the typical corporate capitalist drama. Because all the users are in control the likelihood that someone will try to take over for their own benefit seems less likely. Also could let you do some really cool stuff like fund clean water for a remote village or a jobs fair for homeless in a specific area. Cons: Literally all the users would have to pony up to start the deal. Trying to find a standard price to buy into at the beginning would be difficult and/or getting credit to fund at the could be SUPER dicey. Having a completely democratic structure could mean that painful decisions get done at a glacial pace or not at all.