---
# System prepended metadata

title: Sangam Entities

---

# Sangam Entities

A quick description of the different entities in the Sangam protocol

### Operator

The entity that hosts the centralized platform, routes messages, enforces content policy, authenticates users, etc.

Impeachable by governance.

### Moderator

An entity that isn't necessarily the operator that enforces the content policy of the platform. May remove content and users, may also add users.

It is up to community how moderation team comes to consensus, it may take a single moderation or a quorum or unanimous consent to remove content/user. It can differ from community to community.

Elected and Impeachable by governance.

### User

Permissioned user of the platform. Can post content and participate in community. May vote on governance decisions.

May choose to exit individually in which case, vote token may be revoked.

### Full Node (optional)

An entity that is distinct from the operator yet maintains a partial (or full) replication of the network state and can serve client requests as well. Such an entity would make operator-replacement relatively simple, as there is a readily available list of candidates and reconstructing the old state of the network would not be difficult given the number of partial (potentially full) replicas available.

### Blockchain Validator

Blockchain validators collectively operate the distributed ledger that Sangam will use to record identities and governance decisions. The validator set should be sufficiently decentralized such that they cannot coordinate beyond running the protocol honestly (ie Byzantine fault tolerant) and any single community's authorities (operators, moderators, etc) cannot unilaterally affect blockchain operation. Thus, a community should register their community on a blockchain that hosts many blockchains so that no single community has sizable influence over the validator set.

### Legal Representative (optional, rough)

A rough idea that hasn't been fully flushed out yet. It may be possible for a community to elect and pay a legal representative to act on its behalf. The legal representative would not be liable for content on the platform, but would act in its jurisdiction on the wishes of the community (so long as those wishes aren't illegal in said jurisdiction). Thus, the representative may enter into contracts with the operator or other entities on behalf of the community. It can enforce these contracts by suing any entity for breaking the contract it makes with the community (through the representative).

The legal representative is elected and can be replaced by governance. Most likely the representative will be compensated so it is incentivized to act as competently as possible or the community will stop paying them and they will lose reputation.

NOTE: Legal input needed