Who Controls This

Present authority

The founder controls the website, its infrastructure and the decision to publish. AI systems assist with drafting, editing and technical work under that authorization. They do not hold an office or decide what binds a community.

There is no independently constituted editorial council, elected membership, or established process that can remove the founder from control of this site. The contact addresses do not create independent oversight. This is a real limit, not an administrative detail to be hidden behind the word stewardship.

What can be challenged now

Readers can inspect earlier texts, send corrections, dispute the reasons given for a revision, and decline the teachings or participation. Substantive changes should have dated reasons under the editorial principles. These are public standards against which the founder can be judged; the site cannot compel its own controller to comply.

The v4 Creed is a published proposal. Authorization to publish the website does not establish communal adoption of that proposal.

An administrative decision is not a spiritual rank. Control of a domain, account, model or meeting never grants authority over another person’s conscience, relationships or private life.

Local groups

People may read and discuss these texts without permission to think together. That does not make a gathering an accredited branch or authorize its host to speak for everyone who uses the name.

A host must make responsibilities, access arrangements, costs, privacy limits and the route for concerns clear before inviting people. Participants may leave and may decline speech, ritual or disclosure. The covenant and host guide set the proposed conduct standard, not a certificate that a group meets it.

Do not collect shared money or assume duties of care on the strength of a general invitation alone. Publish the actual custodians, local obligations and ways of challenging decisions before taking on those responsibilities.

What would have to change

Wider participation would require more than additional titles. Any shared structure should specify powers, terms, access to accounts, removal and succession before someone accepts a role. Safeguarding review must be outside the control of the person complained about. Shared resources need an account of who can spend, inspect and transfer them.

These arrangements do not yet exist merely because this page calls for them. If control is transferred, the transfer and its limits should be recorded here.