Community Guidelines – Foundation For The Anti-Christ

Community Guidelines

The community file sets the conduct and moderation posture for comments, summits, contributor work, AI-assisted submissions, direct messages, and protected exchange before those spaces open at larger scale.

Classification Community conduct and moderation policy
Access Public record
Status Official public record under active editorial development

Open the community map Open the recovery guide

Community File

FFTAC-COM-01

Map Routes 4

Operating Sections 4

Quick Routes 5

Critique systems, not protected identities. Govern exchange before scale.

Community Guidelines

If the Foundation opens comments, chats, summit rooms, contributor drafts, or broader discussion spaces, those spaces should run under visible rules before scale arrives.

What This Policy Covers

These guidelines apply to public comments, program applications, summit participation, direct messages routed through Foundation systems, member exchanges, AI-assisted submissions, and contributor collaboration inside protected spaces.

Expected Conduct

Critique arguments, systems, and institutions rather than protected groups or personal identities.
Disagree with reasons, evidence, and clarity instead of intimidation, pile-ons, or contempt theater.
Do not post threats, doxxing, harassment, spam, impersonation, or material meant to destabilize the space through noise rather than thought.
Respect the confidentiality of protected contributor or member spaces unless explicit publication permission is given.
Do not use AI-generated text to impersonate people, manufacture consensus, launder unsupported claims, or evade human accountability for a submission.

Moderation Posture

The Foundation may queue, refuse, remove, archive, or close discussion threads that undermine safety, seriousness, or operational stability. Protected access may be limited or revoked when a participant treats exchange as spectacle, harassment, or recruitment pressure rather than governed discussion.

Recovery-Sensitive Exchange

Many readers arrive from fear-based religion, coercive certainty, or prophecy panic. Discussion spaces should not recreate those pressures through humiliation, countdown panic, identity coercion, or performative certainty disguised as care.

Current Operational Note

Public comment features may remain limited or closed until moderation capacity is ready. Publishing the rule in advance prevents discussion layers from launching without boundaries, review posture, or clear authority.

Governance Map

The community map

Use this page when you need the rules for discussion spaces, moderation authority, confidentiality, launch-time limits, and escalation before interactive layers expand.

Coverage

See which spaces are covered

The policy applies across public comments, summits, member exchange, direct messages, and contributor collaboration.

Open covered spaces

Conduct

Read the expected conduct rules

Critique should stay reasoned, evidence-based, and focused on systems rather than identities or intimidation.

Review conduct rules

Moderation

Inspect moderation authority

The Foundation may queue, refuse, remove, archive, or close exchange when seriousness or safety breaks down.

Open moderation posture

Launch

See the prelaunch operating note

Discussion features may stay narrow or closed until moderation capacity is real rather than performative.

Open the launch note

Covered Spaces

Where the conduct policy applies

The community file reaches beyond hypothetical public comments to any Foundation-managed space where discussion, collaboration, or routed exchange happens.

Public Threads

Comments and open discussion remain covered

If public comments or similar reply layers are opened, they remain subject to the same conduct and moderation standards as protected spaces.

Programs

Summits, cohorts, and contributor lanes are included

Applications, workshops, summit rooms, and collaborative drafting spaces all fall under the same rule set once they move inside Foundation systems.

Open participation routes

AI-Assisted Work

Machine-assisted submissions are still human conduct

Prompts, generated drafts, summaries, and AI-assisted research notes remain subject to the same honesty, disclosure, and non-harassment standards as any other contribution.

Review AI governance

Protected Exchange

Member and routed-message spaces stay governed too

Direct messages, protected channels, and member exchange are not outside the policy simply because they are less public.

Open the membership portal

Expected Conduct

How critique stays serious

The conduct rules keep the Foundation from drifting into pile-ons, identity panic, intimidation, or voyeuristic collapse theater.

Target

Critique arguments and systems rather than protected identities

Disagreement should focus on claims, institutions, technologies, and practices instead of turning people into moral targets by religion or identity.

Review charter boundaries

Method

Reasons and evidence outrank intimidation

Strong disagreement is welcome when it remains grounded in clarity and evidence instead of contempt theater, pile-ons, or coercive posturing.

Open editorial standards

Prohibitions

Threats, doxxing, spam, and impersonation are banned

No one may use Foundation-controlled spaces for threats, harassment, confidential leaks, identity theft, or noise campaigns that destabilize discussion.

Open the terms file

Moderation Posture

How the Foundation may intervene

Moderation authority needs to be visible before a discussion layer scales, otherwise every intervention feels improvised or partisan.

Queue / Refuse / Remove

The Foundation may actively shape discussion conditions

Threads, comments, submissions, or messages may be queued, refused, removed, archived, or closed when they undermine safety, seriousness, or stability.

Access Control

Protected access can be limited or revoked

Members or contributors who treat exchange as harassment, recruitment pressure, or spectacle may lose access to governed spaces.

Review participation expectations

Escalation

Moderation issues should route through a visible desk

Readers need a clear place to report moderation concerns, boundary breaches, or operational issues without turning every dispute into public theater.

Use the contact desk

Launch Readiness

Why these rules arrive before scale

Publishing the conduct policy ahead of larger interactive layers keeps moderation from becoming a post-hoc scramble once pressure and visibility increase.

Capacity

Public discussion may stay narrow until moderation is real

Features can remain limited or closed until the Foundation has enough operational capacity to moderate them without drift or burnout.

Precommitment

Visible rules prevent launch-time improvisation

By naming the boundaries in advance, the Foundation avoids pretending that authority only became necessary after harm or chaos appeared.

Read the charter

Recovery Sensitivity

Discussion spaces must not recreate fear-based pressure

Recovery-facing readers need governed exchange that refuses contempt, panic, and identity coercion even when disagreement is intense.

Open the recovery guide