The Relational Origins of Rules in Online Communities
For researchers and designers of online communities, this work provides a relational theory of rule origins that complements existing operational accounts, though it is an incremental qualitative study.
This study investigates how and why online communities adopt and change their rules through interviews with 40 community leaders, finding that rules are adopted for relational reasons (e.g., signaling legitimacy) beyond operational ones, and that change depends on factors like volunteer capacity and leader-member dynamics.
Where do rules come from in online communities? 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 operational 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. Our findings extend prior theories from social computing and organizational research, illustrating how institutionalist and ecological explanations of the relational origins of rules complement operational accounts. Finally, we build on these explanations to offer a set of design propositions that reflect the relational aspects of rules and rulemaking across communities' lifecycles.