Sadly, Canonizer’s management continues to deny its own existence by characterizing the Canonizer as a “leaderless project”, while promoting anarchy as a solution to the world’s problems.
Herein lies evidence of issues that are obstacles to the success of the Canonizer, and quite possibly insurmountable, unless they are identified for what they are, and overcome.
While the founders and senior management of the Canonizer may be well meaning, being “well meaning” alone is insufficient to overcome real practical issues of project management and credibility, sufficient to support motivation for qualified interest and contributions.
No problem that confronts a community can be overcome until after it is correctly acknowledged to exist. False framing, mischaracterization of actual issues, lofty irrelevant platitudes, and demonstrably inadequate insight both into real issues and workable solutions, cannot be effectively overcome with an abundance of seemingly charitable kindness, pandering civility, calculated obfuscation of relevant discourse, and chronic avoidance of what really matters amidst studied and deliberate character assassination of those who would shine a light on the relevant realities.
The oft repeated goal of the Canonizer is to offer the world a more credible forum than is presumed by its founders to exist anywhere else, in which consensus that serves the greater good of any community, might be achieved with its unique approach to synthesizing and distilling polemic discourse into recognizable points and positions with quantifiable support.
To this end we find the leadership of the Canonizer, which denies its own existence (“leaderless system”) to declare the “Canonizer Canonizer” system of allocating voting shares to qualified voters. Qualified voters, it would seem, control the system, and authorize all meaningful decisions of the project. They are, by their own definition, the ultimate authority over all things Canonizer, and the obstacle that must be overcome to change its course, or its philosophical, social or practical biases on any level.
It would seem voting shares are granted on the basis of dollars invested or time contributed, or some arbitrary combination of the two. The calculations, for which, leaves some wondering. Quality of contributions is not addressed in these formulas, so an idiot could, theoretically, churn the Canonizer clock with imbecilic impunity, and end up with controlling shares as a result.
One observer of management team discussions has suggested such not to be far from the mark.
Countless hours have been invested in arguing why the use of traditionally accepted language should be respected in expressing the views of management, only to be out voted by the majority (in voting shares) view that it is more useful to flush out the potentially interested system participants who have the presumed unhealthy social or cultural conditioning to expect representations to be easily understandable and not self-contradicting.
One founder associated with such keen insight holds over 76% of all voting shares at last count we have seen. The next closest holds less than 5%. So, it would seem a major hostile takeover would be required to overcome the kind of guiding intellectual insight that has represented itself by the advocacy of anarchy, the on again off again denial of the existence of the very decision-making hierarchy heretofore described and the measure of its own creation, the adoption of Mormon-Atheist as its most usefully practical declaration of social and religious identity, and who, as a professed Atheist, proclaims that closing American borders to anyone is “sinfully selfish”, and at odds with how Christ would handle American Immigration. (Clearly not a scholar of the United States Constitution or a credible advocate of the separation of Church and State.)
It took paragraphs in private discussion, no doubt with an increase of voting shares earned by hourly contributions ticking, to rationalize the notion of “sinfully” as somehow not reasonably construed to suggest a religious standard of right and wrong or a relevant religious hierarchy also implied by the name of the system, “Canonizer”. (Look it up).
Unfortunately, insofar as we are aware, the Canonizer is not a publicly traded stock corporation and sufficient shares to buy out a majority are not being offered. Even if they were, questions of system value would likely defeat the ambition amidst other competing forces in the market for survey clients.
We suggest the salvation and success of the Canonizer lies with the long shot of convincing the majority voting share holder that his world view needs to be overhauled and his primary mentors need to be replaced or reconsidered. Sadly, it does not seem that his closest friends and confidants, who we believe, are on his payroll, dare risk that enterprise.
The point of this suggestion is that he take responsibility for the reality of the management of the Canonizer that exists, and the choices of that management, and take someone who loves him enough to risk calling out bull shit for what it is far more seriously and show that same someone considerably more respect for his efforts.
See also: Support Accountability
See also: Critique of No Censoring Camp
See also: Consider Urgencies and Priorities