03/31/2018 (Sat) 00:19:19
I see it like this.
You must start with a group of people with similar values. Large, experienced/educated, dedicated and coordinated enough to effectively single out, ignore and outproduce undesired content and while keeping user count at organic growth levels. Population both in quantitative and qualitative sense can be regulated by level of public exposure and entry barriers. This is the difficult part, since there were many places that started good but couldn't keep it that way because of unwelcome influx. Another thing is to make the core principles as clear as possible while jokes undermining it shortlived and fairly obvious. If you make the culture too vague you make it harder to get into it properly but that won't stop people who'll end up misunderstanding it (see that quote about pretending to be idiots). It can be said that whining and approving are largely similar in terms of entertainment value while up/downvotes facilitate reliance on group for judgement however, just as undesired content needs to be deprived of attention desired content needs to receive it. Some kind of mechanism of reward has to function within the group which, ideally, would be creatively engaging the content but that's not always feasible, therefore an action that is more accessible and requires less effort(eg. reposting) needs to be seen as acceptable by the group.
If a group has already gone awry but you have enough people supporting you or your cause fits with the founding values of the group (in which case you'll be able to prove your point and get people to support you) you can try expelling creators of undesired content by making environment inhabitable for them. For that you need to know your enemy, obviously, but also have authorities like moderation be powerless to stop you or congruent.