@guk, people thinking that some centralized, structured governance will solve issues like this still don't understand crypto. Even if we had a Central Gridcoin Committee with unlimited powers (on paper), how do you think such a committee would be able to prevent anyone from posting on Steemit or Reddit? Such ideas are unworkable (to put it mildly) and usually create even worse problems in the end.
Let me use a simple analogy - how many times have you seen posts like "Bitcoin is dead" during last few days, in the context of Bitcoin forking issues? Plenty of times, right? Now, did you see anyone from "Bitcoin governance" banning and deleting such posts? You didn't. Because the idea of Bitcoin is much bigger than a few poorly written posts.
Want to help Gridcoin? Begin with yourself. Align your images. Correct your typos. Don't rely on some centralized governance (which doesn't even exist), rely on yourself and your own high-quality content.
I understand crypto fine thank you. I also understand that there is a cultural element to the crypto community based in its history, that any centralisation is bad, hence why I said it was a dangerous argument to raise.
As to your other points, I would not and did not suggest a "Central Committee with unlimited power". Any overarching system of rules and governance has to be by consent of the community, we already have the basis for a system in-place with the in-built voting system.
What I am suggesting is that any rules, and the moderators who could enforce them, would be voted in or out. The key thing is that the community at large has the power, anybody voted into any role is basically an administrator, if they abuse there position they could then be removed at the will of the community. I don't have all the answers, that is why it is a discussion.
Of course any rules and such can only be applied to official GRC channels, the examples of Steemit and Reddit that you give are a case in point. I would expect that we would not try and censor opinion on these social media platforms as they are not official GRC channels and as such are opinion pieces. However instead we should be able to show a professional face that represents what GRC stands for on any official channels and accounts, these include but are not limited to:
etc etc.
This stuff is the basics of Branding and Marketing. If someone joins one of our official channels , what impression do you want them to go away with?
As an example if someone joins our IRC channel in the middle of a flamewar or in the middle of a completly offtopic discussion on drugs they are much more likely to take away a negative opinion of GRC. Like the saying says, "first impressions".
I apologise if you think my post doesn't come up to your standards with regards typo's, images etc. but as I pointed out I created it whilst drunk and was very much a braindump.
One last thing, writing the post off as "More low quality nonsense" on one of the aforementioned channels does you no favours. The issues raised are real and I am making realistic suggestions on how to improve things, just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it is low quality or nonsense.
Well, I think this comment is actually better than the article itself, if it's of any comfort to you.
You know that Ronald Reagan (I think) ironical quote on federal government: "ah, the great things we could do, if we only had more power" (paraphrased). That's how every enthusiastic official feels, but it backfires almost every time. I think I'll rather have some off-topic chat in IRC than a rigid system of rules and governance, thank you. I guess if the crypto can handle Potcoin ("network and banking solution for the marijuana industry"), it can handle some off-topic ganja chat on some IRC channel. To be 100% clear, I don't like it too, therefore I am not on IRC very often. But no doubt, some would say that posting articles on Steemit with tags #Gridcoin and #drunk is more detrimental to Gridcoin's image than some IRC ramblings. We can argue over it forever. Dead-end alley.