what is the solution? community moderation
so, how are toxic situations handled?
	factual innacuracies
	calls for violence
	tribalist slurs
	body shaming
	spamming
	brigading
	egotism
what needs to happen in any case is that attention to the problem serves to add nuance, provide calm, restore respect, clarify contravercy.
the problem is when attepting to solve the problem directs attention towards the problem, rewarding the trouble-makers.
==========================
for months i was working from a model in which moderators had 3 options, to bet on challenger, incumbent, or neither.
but i thought that too complex. now im considering a model with just one bet. but does it work? im uncertain.
generally, one wonders about the neccesity of punishment. do accounts that deharmonize ynnuf need to be banned?
i dont want to ban anyone. can safety be assured by other means? well, do you actually beleive in trying to assure safety? isnt that bs, orwellian bs?
ynnuf is a game. games have winners and losers. ynnuf aims to make the trolls pay.
protecting people from other people's thoughts is a non-goal.
that said, intellectual property rights are important. specifically, neighborhoods matter. space matters. 
under no circumstance shall my art be sullied by trolls. fuck that.
permission matters. 
=====================
the ownership of language

parts owned by individuals?

terms owned by groups?
ynnuf owned by moderators?
that sounds nice. but no...
if parts are owned by individual accounts, does that mean there's no resharing of parts? this makes parts effectively nfts. non-transferable nfts. wack.
ok, the part/term many-to-one relation doesnt quite work.