Mediation-Cells

In Planning

The conflict-cell could be one possible answer to the question of how to introduce some kind of "immune system" to haelp. How can we ensure the integrity of the network and prevent "bad actions" from happening as best as possible?

The concept of the conflict-cell could look as follows:

Whenever two users are in the same realm of a cell (can be in any of the different user roles / relationships with a cell: steward, member OR candidate), either one of the 2 parties can create a conflict-cell linking both the initiating user and the user the conflict exists with.

The conflict gets described and the cell populated as "public" out into the network for everyone to see and find it.

Finding this cell can help others know about how many open, failed or accomplished/resolves conflicts a user has "on their name" and therefore gives an idea on how "harmony-seeking" a user is. The goal for every user should be to keep their number of unresolved (open + failed) conflict-cells to a minimum as an indicator of "good behaviour".

Each conflict-cell then also requires to join a mediator who helps settling the conflict. This mediator could be randomly selected / invited to join from a curated / validated community of mediators (something like haelp-mediators) where their group of stewards decides / defines on what requirements such a community member (a.k.a mediator) shall have. The idea would be that the mediator talks to both parties (either via chat, video call or in person?) and help them to settle whatever their conflict might be. The mediator could then also decide about and define possible "activities" one or both parties have to accomplish in order to settle their conflict — this could be something like a peace-making activity together or something more like a "penalty activity" such as re-taking (a.k.a re-entering a skill-cell like "respectful-communication" e.g.).

[...]

Comparison to "reviews & ratings" in the current P2P eco-system

We think what the first generation P2P systems and applications came up with was a great start: users being able to "review" or "rate" other users for something such as a purchase or a service.

What this mechanism and system falls short at is the fact that reviews and ratings - especially if they are rather "negative" or filled with some kind of critique - cannot be revoked or resolved which sets a less-than-ideal starting ground for publishing them to begin with [...]

So by introducing "conflict-cells" we build on the foundation of reviews and ratings, but give users a possibility to resolve them and come to a mutally-accepted solution or conclusion — whatever that might look like!

Thereby we would like to achieve that people neither simply claim things about each other nor have to feel bad about a critique they might have received nor simply walk away from each other when a conflict arises. We want to incentivise and promote the resolution of conflicts and the creation of harmony among each other. This doesn't mean that everyone has to be "best friends" with everyone. But the idea is that we don't create unnecessary "enemies" in our heads and talk to each other about the things that we criticise about their behaviour. We want to create, foster and nurture a culture of kind, honest and resolving communication among all users. [...]