I think this is a reasonable application of existing policy, although the “community” tag would have also been a reasonable application.
However, I think the policy is wrong insofar as the interest in not burying credible allegations of improper conduct of interest to the community as a large should supersede the “politics=personal blog” rule. In other words, an exception to cover this sort of post should be written into the rules.
My guess is the rule is there to avoid imperiling not-for-profit status; if so the mods don’t really have much choice. I agree with you we don’t want to bury such things, but I think the best solution here is just to hive the partisan part (which was I think also the least important part) into a separate post.
I haven’t thought about it much, but I would be very surprised if this was a concern on the US end at least (or by moving it to personal blog post would allay any concern). It’s not the organization’s own speech.
I think this is a reasonable application of existing policy, although the “community” tag would have also been a reasonable application.
However, I think the policy is wrong insofar as the interest in not burying credible allegations of improper conduct of interest to the community as a large should supersede the “politics=personal blog” rule. In other words, an exception to cover this sort of post should be written into the rules.
My guess is the rule is there to avoid imperiling not-for-profit status; if so the mods don’t really have much choice. I agree with you we don’t want to bury such things, but I think the best solution here is just to hive the partisan part (which was I think also the least important part) into a separate post.
I haven’t thought about it much, but I would be very surprised if this was a concern on the US end at least (or by moving it to personal blog post would allay any concern). It’s not the organization’s own speech.