I guess I don't see how the channels are useful to me. They seem like normal social media stuff that just encourages filter bubbles and other than filter bubbling doesn't do anything to bring signal over the noise, so you just have noise reinforcing particular framings. Moderation only improves the quality theoretically, since actual facilitation is generally too much work for people to bother to volunteer for it for free. What I'd like is groups with defined restricted membership and both an inside and an outside, so the group works together not just to communicate with themselves about how much they agree with themselves, but also about how to relate to the outside world. For instance you could have both private posts that stay inside the group, and also you can propose a public post which goes out to the public presentation of the group after a day or two only if no one in the group blocks its publication. As well as private and public communication it could also be useful to have a way that groups can have organized collective communication with other groups, like if you could start a thread and choose which groups to include as participants. It's useful to have two levels of restricting participation, defined restricted group membership and then also choosing which groups to include, because then you can reuse the work put into making small actual groups of real people to allow you to quickly aggregate them into larger groups.