Hence, posts like this should be “Personal Blog” unless they involve discussion of other topics as well.
Most of the introductory paragraphs of this post were pointing to more general gaps in entrepreneurial support (i.e. other topics).To be clear, I think the decision you made may have been reasonable. However, this post doesn’t match the criteria you stated for setting posts as Personal Blog. I think for moderation to be credible here, the criteria and underlying reasons must be clear to readers.
Two paragraphs at the beginning briefly mention the general idea that donors should consider funding entrepreneurs, but that subject is left behind for the rest of the post (until the very last line, I suppose). The post didn’t feel to me like it was really inviting much discussion of entrepreneurship in general.
I won’t set a hard number for what “percentage” of a post’s content has to be something other than a personal funding request for it to be on the front page (that would be impossible to measure), but it felt to me like the general content was a brief addendum to the detailed personal request, rather than vice-versa. In my view (from the inherently subjective position of “Forum moderator”), that balance equates to a post being a better fit for the “Personal Blog” category.
It’s absolutely within your rights to disagree, of course! The boundaries of these categories are fuzzy.
This sounds reasonable to me actually. The rest of the post was about making a specific case for funding my entrepreneurial work, rather than expounding on widespread bottlenecks entrepreneurs seem to face to get funded for doing good work and developing it further. I started writing a 10-page draft to try to more detachedly analyse work by and interactions between entrepreneurs and funders.
The Forum’s moderators have had some discussion in the past on whether job listings should ever appear on Frontpage; it was a close call, but we think a few such posts once in a while is okay. However, I expect that there are many more potential job applicants than potential grantmakers on the Forum, so posts like this are less likely to be relevant to a random reader than a job listing.
Could you disambiguate some terms here? I see I misread this paragraph before. I’m more confused now about what you’re specifically saying. E.g. - were you trying to say that there are ‘many more potential grantees than grantmakers’ (clearly true though this post was more aimed at smaller funders looking for an argued case)- or were you implying I was posting as a job applicant (that doesn’t seem right, as explained two comments above)
I would like to step in here and say that I did not communicate with Remmelt before uploading my own post, and my own post may be less well-prepared than Remmelt’s and I am totally happy to remove it. I would not like the idea of being responsible for having Remmelt’s post removed from the Frontpage, and Remmelt has put a lot more work into his proposal than I have.
I wasn’t trying to say either of those things. What I meant was:
Job posts appeal to a specific audience (people looking for jobs)
Posts by potential grantees appeal to a specific audience (people looking to make grant-sized donations)
I believe that the first audience is larger than the second audience, which means that presenting the former type of post on the frontpage is somewhat more reasonable. However, it’s possible that neither type of post should ever be frontpage/that we should amend our categorization system in various other ways.