Community expertise resides in two competing dynamics:
(1) the legitimation of “aggregate” opinion, as opinions tend toward an equilibrium, even on controversial issues
(2) the openness of the community to dissenting opinions, with the potential to change the
aggregate consensus.
In successful online communities, these dynamics produce confidence in the knowledge-making process, rather than confidence in any particular instance of expert opinion. The system is legitimate to the degree that it represents a properly constituted authority in the eyes of the community of users. (David, 2007)
An expert in the YouTube community I would say is a user that knows which issues are at play amongst the community. Relating to David’s point on expertise, one could say that a diverse group of random active users can be part of a possible moderating hierarchy.
By looking at the existing hierarchical moderation systems, I see hierarchy amongst users as a proven non-monetary incentive for users to participate. Only ‘Funny or Die’ does not make use of this, but they place themselves (the staff) in the watchdog position. And this particular platform deals with a basic binary question of whether the viewer thinks a video is funny or not. In that sense Digg, but especially Wikipedia and YouTube are platforms containing broader discussions and opinions.
The controversy around the ‘Bury Brigade’ is somewhat similar to the reactions about the misuse of the flagging system on YouTube. Issues like accountability and transparency come up in both these issues. Whether or not the discussion is justified, it’s interesting that both these widely used services stir up such a discussion. Which can be because these users feel left out of the system because of the lack insight in the system and their the minor participative role they play in it. It is not similar to CL Pet controversy on Craigslist, because the people in that discussion blame each other instead of the system. The only aspect on which they blame the system is for not putting their TOS clear enough.
By not only introducing a certain form of hierarchy, but also by positioning the community in the role of the watchdog YouTube would take over certain qualities of both Slashdot as well as Wikipedia. Which results in a system of meta-moderation of flags – flagging of the users will be by the users, for the users – thereby taking the next step in the grassroots convergence on YouTube towards a more open, democratic platform.