Index Moderation Protocol

This protocol governs how the Network Nations Index is moderated — maintaining quality and coherence while supporting open contribution through a transparent pull request workflow.

Instantiation

Trigger Type: Action-based

Trigger Condition:

• A contributor submits a pull request to the Index repository
• A concern is raised about an existing entry
• Periodic review is conducted

Authority & Oversight

Role	Authority	Accountability
Steward Council	Final moderation decisions, merge authority	Alliance Assembly
Reviewing Steward	Reviews and approves/requests changes on PRs	Steward Council
Contributor	Submits PRs with accurate information	Reviewing Steward

Moderation Principles

• Open by default: The Index welcomes contributions; PRs are merged unless clearly misaligned
• Light touch: Review focuses on alignment and accuracy, not editorial judgment
• Transparency: All moderation happens in public PR comments
• Appeal available: Rejected PRs may appeal to full Steward Council

Entry Criteria

Entries should demonstrate alignment with the Network Nation Definition:

Must have:

• Distributed community (not purely local)
• Shared identity or coherence
• Some form of coordination or governance
• Genuine activity (not vaporware)

Red flags (may warrant rejection):

• Purely commercial venture with no community aspect
• No evidence of actual activity or membership
• Misrepresentation or false claims
• Content that conflicts with Alliance values

Rights & Responsibilities

Contributor

Rights:

• Fork the Index repository
• Submit pull requests for new entries or updates
• Receive review feedback within 14 days
• Receive explanation if PR is not merged
• Appeal rejection to Steward Council

Responsibilities:

• Provide accurate information
• Follow contribution guidelines and templates
• Respond to review comments and requested changes
• Update entries when circumstances change

Reviewing Steward

Rights:

• Review and comment on pull requests
• Request changes before merge
• Approve and merge PRs that meet criteria
• Close PRs that clearly don’t meet criteria
• Flag PRs for Council review

Responsibilities:

• Review PRs within 14 days
• Apply criteria consistently
• Provide clear, constructive feedback
• Escalate uncertain cases to Council

Process Sequence

Step	Action	Actor	Duration	Output
1	Fork repository	Contributor	—	Personal fork created
2	Create/edit entry	Contributor	—	Changes in branch
3	Submit pull request	Contributor	—	PR open for review
4	Review PR	Reviewing Steward	Within 14 days	Approved, changes requested, or flagged
5	Address feedback (if needed)	Contributor	14 days	PR updated
6	Final decision	Steward (or Council)	Within 7 days	PR merged or closed
7	Appeal (if requested)	Steward Council	Within 14 days	Appeal decided

Step 1-3: Submission

Contributors:

1. Fork the Network Nations Index repository
2. Create a new branch for their changes
3. Add or edit entry following the provided template
4. Submit a pull request with clear description

PR description should include:

• Type of change (new entry, update, correction)
• Brief summary of the Network Nation or resource
• Any relevant context

Step 4: Review

Reviewing Steward examines the PR:

• Approve: Entry meets criteria; PR merged
• Request Changes: Minor issues to address; contributor updates PR
• Flagged: Uncertain case referred to Steward Council
• Close: Entry clearly doesn’t meet criteria; explanation provided in comments

Step 5: Iteration

If changes requested:

• Contributor addresses feedback in PR
• Steward re-reviews updated PR
• Process continues until resolved

Step 6: Resolution

• Merged: Entry live in Index
• Closed: PR not merged; contributor may appeal or submit revised PR later

Periodic Review

Steward Council conducts annual review of Index entries to:

• Identify inactive or defunct projects
• Flag outdated information for update
• Ensure continued alignment

Entries may be marked inactive or archived via PR if projects become defunct.

Completion & Outputs

Protocol completes when:

• PR is merged
• PR is closed (with appeal period passed)
• Appeal is decided

Outputs:

• Index entry (if merged)
• Public PR record with review history
• Communication via PR comments

Exceptions & Edge Cases

• Borderline cases: When alignment is unclear, err toward merging with notation
• Prominent rejections: If closing PR for well-known project, Steward Council reviews collectively
• Self-removal: Entry maintainers may submit PR to remove their own entries at any time
• Urgent corrections: Stewards may make direct commits for critical fixes, documented in commit history

Related Protocols

• Steward Council Protocol — Appeal handling