2022-01-25, 06:07 AM
The current four board custodians recognise that our community's health depends in part on the maintenance of healthy ratios between:
More generally, do we need to revisit the question of (especially controversial) non-topical discussions and content on this board, and in particular to reevaluate the compromise of (which is) the opt-in forums, which was democratically chosen early on in our board's existence?
We recognise that there is strength in a diversity of opinions which does not devolve into an outright incompatibility of opinions. We believe that our community possesses that strength, while also recognising the possibility on this topic of that bitter devolution into incompatibility. We encourage you, then, as we open up this conversation, to harness our differences in imagining a way forward rather than to divide over them.
With that, the floor is open to those who wish to contribute.
- Top-down decision-making by us, and bottom-up decision-making by the general membership, especially via explicit consultation.
- Topical and non-topical posting.
- Fact-based content, and expressions of opinion.
- Balanced discussions, and campaigning - via the repetitive posting of external content such as videos and tweets - for causes.
More generally, do we need to revisit the question of (especially controversial) non-topical discussions and content on this board, and in particular to reevaluate the compromise of (which is) the opt-in forums, which was democratically chosen early on in our board's existence?
We recognise that there is strength in a diversity of opinions which does not devolve into an outright incompatibility of opinions. We believe that our community possesses that strength, while also recognising the possibility on this topic of that bitter devolution into incompatibility. We encourage you, then, as we open up this conversation, to harness our differences in imagining a way forward rather than to divide over them.
With that, the floor is open to those who wish to contribute.