marp: true
theme: default
paginate: true
size: 16:9
style: |
  section {
    font-family: Georgia, "Times New Roman", serif;
    font-size: 30px;
    padding: 56px 72px;
  }
  h1, h2 {
    font-family: "Trebuchet MS", "Segoe UI", sans-serif;
    color: #111111;
  }
  h1 {
    font-size: 1.55em;
    margin-bottom: 0.35em;
  }
  h2 {
    font-size: 1.05em;
    margin-top: 0;
  }
  ul {
    margin-top: 0.5em;
  }
  strong {
    color: #000000;
  }
  footer {
    color: #444444;
    font-size: 0.48em;
  }

Byzantine Fault-Tolerant Governance for Internet Message Boards

Exit-oriented architecture under adversarial moderation

We / MIT

Claim

• Message boards have a governance availability problem.

• The usual architecture assumes moderators remain reasonable forever.

• This is not a safe systems assumption.

Threat Model

• hostile maintainers

• moderator coups

• non-consensual platform updates

• burnout, disappearance, selective export denial

We model these as ordinary infrastructure faults.

Prior Art

• Packet loss is damage.

• Link failure is damage.

• Censorship is damage.

• Communities should route around moderator damage.

Mechanism

• repository archive with canonical content and history

• SQLite read-model for local browsing and inspection

• complete board snapshot, not a courtesy export

Forking is not governance failure. Forking is failover.

Result

• admins can control an instance, but not necessarily the future

• users inherit a practical means of refusal

• bad governance becomes less final

Emergent Property

• repeated schism produces more forks

• operational sovereignty becomes cheaper

• the admin-to-user ratio may exceed 1.0

We treat this as a success condition.

Byzantine Fault-Tolerant Governance for Internet Message Boards

• moderator authoritarianism is ordinary infrastructure failure

• communities should be able to route around moderator damage

• portable state makes governance failure less final

• forking is failover

Questions, forks, and constitutional crises