Creddit

Moderators of journals, content platforms, and social media are often biased, profit-driven, and open to collusion. Users are unhappy. Although moderation is successful in many cases, successful centralized moderation is often autocratic and limited in scope (reddit). Thus we propose Creddit, a decentralized content moderation platform. Our proposed use case of Creddit is in scientific literature. Creddit employs a tokenized incentive model for reviewers to 1.vote for and 2. write detailed reviews for open access publications. This incentive structure also seeks to provide value to scientific authors, reviewers, and viewers. Creddit reviewers are:

• Anonymous to eliminate fear of backlash
• Verified for proper credentials
• Randomized to avoid sybil attacks
• Compensated fairly on a review-by-review basis

Creddit’s current moderation strategy is positive rather than negative content selection. We don’t envision this being a platform that censors information, but rather applies expert filters.

More abstractly, we acknowledge that a drawback of Creddit’s incentive structure is less skin in the game from reviewers. That said, we believe that the benefits of reduced friction outweigh the benefits of collecting collateral from reviewers.

Future directions include

• Onboarding reputable scientists to seed a culture of rational criticism
• Implementing zero-knowledge proofs to evaluate the reputation of contributors while maintaining their anonymity

The onboarding process involves the user’s wallet being connected with World ID to determine that the user is human and Polygon ID to determine the user’s credentials. The review platform uses several notification protocols, including Push Protocol to notify reviewers about new content review requests and XMTP for messaging between reviewer/writer. The contract has been deployed on several chains, including Skale, Optimism, and Ethereum testnet. Since they are all EVM, this was done with no changes to the code.