@clayton absolutely! It should be part of our core mission. Though we probably have a bit to go in creating, testing, and documenting best practices. especially at a larger scale than we are currently at.
@mattcropp @clayton for sure. I'm kind of looking at this as a radical experiment in direct democracy at scale. I think over time we could prove out a proper balance between representative and direct and between volunteerism and more stable (voted/assigned/re-volving) remunerated roles.
And truth be told if you look at current governance participation (far from optimal collective self selected or no) it is running as de-facto representative governance.
@rbenjamin @clayton @mattcropp
however open source works best. i'm happy to hear of your work. 
@rbenjamin @mattcropp good points all around. A break down of the different options for governance and remuneration with pros and cons would be helpful too. These are the decisions that too often get decided by the technologists, w/o much user input.
@mattcropp There are still too few women and PoC here.
Rule of thumb: for every white man you recruit, recruit two women and/or poc. For every white male's post you favorite and boost, favorite and boost two by women/poc. This helps change the conversation and its protagonists.
#equity #conscioususe
@rbenjamin @clayton I think there's also a really interesting question around direct vs. #RepresentativeDemocracy.
We've basically self-selected the most optimal possible user base for directly democratic collective self-governance, but is that transferrable to communities with lower levels of democratic literacy and participation interest? Is a representative model (members elect a board once a year) more broadly transferable? #instances