  1882101698996609151 it's taking advantage of the 1/9/90 effect by having the 1% of dedicated autists, and the lion's share of the 9% that can track internet drama and microcultures, get control of something. it functions as a "democracy of the 'elite'" where 'elite' is communal buy-in/clout/loyalty/ingroup signal/whatever it is not that different from the same dynamics that govern the polity around making this thread, which can arise on an anarchic board of misanthropes without special affordance (unlike, say, reddit updoots, or wikipedia hierarchy of editors). the more affordances that protect a hierarchy, the more stable it is albeit strongly centralized (see, for example, how on niche topics a couple wikipedia mods can become the final say on them). the less, the more "egalitarian" but that usually just means more chaotic (see community notes wars, or the many attempts to hijack or otherwise disrupt this thread) i'll go out on a limb and say most specific internet dynamics are a result of 1/9/90 in some fashion. humans seem to have two modes of group behavior, follow the leader and follow the crowd. 1/9/90 allows this to be met in the middle to some extent. stuff follows group dynamics, resembling the will of the crowd/mass politics, but you uncover the details and you almost always find the crowds conglomerate around rallying points, "influencers" or leaders elon went to community notes because he still believes to some extent meritocratic marketplace of ideas stuff that he thinks his views inherently succeed in - he still has a libertarian streak, and his move towards the far-right isn't a contradiction with that. most anons also try to hold a double identity as both put-upon libertarians and aspiring fascists. following the wikipedia model of communal fact-checking and """consensus""" of epistemic baseline is inline with that libertarian streak, something he picked up from following what, lesswrong currents previously?
United States