Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Enhancing community involvement with per-site Help Centers
By my understanding, one of the key features of the Codidact network is that individual communities are more in control of their local policies. In particular, it appears that community moderators are able to edit the per-community Help Center documents (e.g. this listing for Meta itself) and perhaps add new ones.
However, I feel like there is a general lack of transparency in this process, even if the overall resulting governance is transparent and community-oriented.
Is my guess correct? The FAQ isn't detailed enough for me to discern this.
Which help center documents, if any, are controlled by the Codidact Foundation, and which may be modified by the community? The organization of the article listing seems a bit arbitrary, and the distinction between "Help" and "Policy" columns isn't completely clear to me either.
Why are the "Network FAQ" and "Codidact FAQ" separate documents?
If communities indeed set some of their own policies, it doesn't appear that there's any formal procedure for this. The closest I could find was this example of a round-table discussion in the Software Meta category to update the site's topicality guidance, along with some related Meta questions specifically asking whether specific things would be on topic. It seems like a moderator took the initiative to solicit the discussion, personally took the apparent consensus into consideration, and made changes accordingly. Is that indeed the process?
Do others agree with me, that it would be good for community engagement (and thus growth) to have more direct involvement and a clearer idea of how to get involved?