While it’s true that someone with more tokens has more “voting power” than someone with fewer tokens, that in no way means they can set the rules. The beating heart of Civil is the Constitution. It represents the standards and ethics that define trustworthy journalism on Civil. Any challenge to a newsroom needs to specifically cite what provision of the Constitution is being violated. That bring a level of rigour to the process which means one larger token holder can’t run away with the process. But there is another very important set of checks and balances as well: the Civil Council, which is comprised of experienced journalists, academics, attorneys and others. If someone on the minority side of a challenge vote – be they a newsroom or token holder – feels the vote went the wrong way, they can appeal that decision to the Council to review the challenge, and then either uphold or overturn the community’s decision based on a careful analysis. And beyond that there is yet another check insofar as the community can overturn the council decision by a supermajority, i.e. 67% of the vote. Given these constraints, it would be very difficult to game the system. That said, once Civil goes live, we’ll monitor carefully to make sure the spirit of Civil remains intact.