The Relational Origins of Rules in Online Communities
Charles Kiene, Sohyeon Hwang, Nathan TeBlunthuis, Carl Colglazier, Aaron Shaw, Benjamin Mako Hill
TL;DR
This paper investigates the origins of online community rules, arguing that rules arise from both functional needs and relational considerations such as signaling legitimacy and shaping community identity. Using a comparative, grounded theory study of 40 leaders across Reddit subreddits, Fandom wikis, and Fediverse servers, it identifies seven processes of rule adoption and change and shows how platform design and inter-community dynamics influence governance. The findings extend institutional isomorphism and organizational ecology perspectives by highlighting how rules mediate relationships to platforms, other communities, and audiences, not just internal enforcement goals. The study offers design implications, such as providing rule templates, cross-community coordination tools, and governance-support features to accommodate lifecycle changes and limited volunteer capacity, with practical impact for building more robust digital institutions.
Abstract
Where do rules come from in online communities? While prior studies of online community governance in social computing have sought to characterize rules by their functions and enforcement practices, scholars have largely overlooked rule adoption and change. This study investigates how and why online communities adopt and change their rules. We conducted a grounded theory-based analysis of 40 in-depth interviews with community leaders from subreddits, Fandom wikis, and Fediverse servers, and identified seven processes involved in the adoption of online community rules. Our findings reveal that, beyond functional reasons like regulating behavior and solving problems, rules are also adopted and changed for relational reasons, such as signaling or reinforcing community legitimacy and identity to other communities. While rule change was often prompted by challenges during community growth or decline, change also depended on volunteer leaders' work capacity, the presence of member feedback mechanisms, and relational dynamics between leaders and members. The findings extend prior theories from social computing and organizational research, illustrating how institutionalist and ecological explanations of the relational origins of rules complement functional accounts. The results also support design recommendations that integrate the relational aspects of rules and rulemaking to facilitate successful governance across communities' lifecycles.