[decentralised]

What I think will happen is that voters are incentivised to make good on the promise of the platform. If they reject a conservative site based on anything dubious then the whole effort will lose credibility.

Don't forget that some form of voting is necessary for the token holders to have a say in the governance of the business. That's one of the premise of blockchain native businesses, the decentralisation of equity and power.

The voting and incentive mechanisms are the cryptoeconomic properties of the project and what I can discuss intelligently. The Civil constitution is out of my scope but I trust the incentives are there to allow high quality media to enter the list regardless of political bias.

[sparkzilla]

>If they reject a conservative site based on anything dubious then the whole effort will lose credibility.

That's not determined. They may well gain credibility by rejecting alternative views.

>Don't forget that some form of voting is necessary for the token holders to have a say in the governance of the business.

Bitcoin doesn't have any governance, and it seems to work fine. Adding governance layers just seems to lead to more problems.