Community guidelines function as a constitution crystallizing moderation through encounters

Evidence

Still, how they are articulated is of enormous importance. For practical reasons, social media platforms need rules that can be followed, that make sense to users, that give their policy team a reasonably clear guide for deciding what to remove, that leave enough breathing room for questionable content they might want to retain, that can change over time, and that will provide a satisfactory justification for removals if they’re disputed, whether by users themselves or in the glare of public scrutiny. More than that, articulating the rules is the clearest opportunity for the platforms to justify their moderation efforts as legitimate. The rules are their most deliberate and carefully crafted statement of principles—not just of what is or is not permitted, but why. Less an instruction manual for how to moderate, the community guidelines are what remains after moderation, like a constitution, documenting the principles as they have been forged over routine encounters with users and occasional skirmishes with the public. — Tarleton Gillespie, Custodians of the Internet, 148

Categorization

• XREF: The constitution analogy for private rule sets echoes the broader platform-governance literature running through chapters 1-2 of this same book. — connects to: Community guidelines mainly signal users, advertisers, and lawmakers — Tarleton Gillespie, Custodians of the Internet: Platforms,…, 155; Targets of abuse encounter moderation whether or not they seek it — Tarleton Gillespie, Custodians of the Internet: Platforms,…, 674
• recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source

Broader Connections

• Targets of abuse encounter moderation whether or not they seek it #expands (0.85) — Tarleton Gillespie, Custodians of the Internet, 674