Although this thesis has a high hypothetical degree to it, if it were to be applied to YouTube, one of the biggest pitfalls would be that it would force many user of the YouTube community out of their comfort zone by changing the rules of the game.
“We are in a critical moment of transition during which the old rules are open to change and companies may be forced to renegotiate their relationship to consumers. The question is whether the public is ready to push for greater participation or willing to settle for the same old relations to mass media.”
The risk of game play.
There is also a chance that the strategy of reputation backfires because of game play. It is not unlikely it would create a competition amongst users for achieving the highest rank. And as we’ve seen happening with existing aspects of YouTube, this system of reputation will also be tested on its boundaries and perhaps appropriated in ways we cannot predict.
Chance of oligarchy
With the chance of game play and the consequences of this, it is feasible that a certain amount of users seize power in this newly evolved democracy and turns from being ruled by the people into ruled by the few.
Tyranny of the majority
The phrase ‘tyranny of the majority’, used in discussing systems of democracy and majority rule, is a criticism of the scenario in which decisions made by a majority under that system would place that majority’s interests so far above a minority’s interest as to be comparable to tyrannical despots.
Is this a way of giving the power over to the users?
One could argue that it only applies a part of the moderation system and leaves out the legal and corporate part as earlier mentioned. The user can help enforce the rules of the house, but they are not allowed to either make them or break them. It is however not unlikely that the user community come to see of the platform as their territory, a phenomenon that is also witnessed in the area of player production in games;
“when designers take user engagement seriously, users sometimes come to feel they have a real stake in the product. The issue, then, is not just how to encourage player-produced content. It is also to fundamentally think about, fully acknowledge, and integrate into the game structure the engagement and strong commitment of player-producers and the sense of investment that often follows. Raph Koster, chief creative officer for Sony Online Entertainment, has written an imaginative exercise entitled “Declaring the Rights of Players” (Koster, 2000). It is striking in the ways it envisions virtual world users as citizens of that space, with due attendant rights. As a thought experiment, it is a great example of the kinds of things we might have to consider when we reformulate passive consumption into active engagement.” (Taylor, 2007, p.125)
It should be emphasized the new system is in order to democratize YouTube. And the idea of the users being citizens of that space, with due attendant rights fits right in there. Not only of having the right to free speech, but also the right to be held accountable for their actions. Leaving the company deal with corporate, legal and marketing aspects of this democracy in order for the platform to exist.
