Sciforums Open Government is, at present, much like its name--foggy. There is no real definition, no sense of clear expectation around here. SFOG saw in its advent ripples of strife in the Ban Wars, but has also shown itself to be a useful tool for addressing broader issues (e.g. forum combination & rename). Enthusiasm is lukewarm; before there is a structure to criticize, SFOG already meets criticism. The idea is, in its current form, ineffective and uninviting to some, daresay repulsive. Myself? I'm very happy with the idea. Before being a moderator I was always caught between the idea of whether or not we could resolve issues between ourselves and at what point it would have been profitable to ask for intervention. In reality, what many of us seem to desire is someplace far more civilized than the present atmosphere permits in certain fora--e.g. WE&P, Religion, EM&J, &c. But at the same time, even I have been unable to simply slap on a silly grin and sally forth in blissful ignorance of the slings and arrows. So I find myself wondering what SFOG can do, and what I expect of it. Are ban proposals really a good idea? Perhaps, but there is no underlying process. As such ban fights seem to be wrapped up in idealism and identity politics, and not in bettering the Sciforums user experience. And, as SFOG is intended to enhance the user experience at Sciforums, how exactly should we, as users, go about fashioning that enhancement? But given the nature of the ban proposals, I could construct a hefty "enemies" list and campaign for the removal of somewhere between several and many. And some folks would be taken aback at some of the names on the list. So while I think something like a ban proposal or other action request is certainly well-within the potential of SFOG, it seems like cutthroat anarchy without any real consensus among users as to what we expect in terms of moderation and administrative action in response to ... well, what issues? Is SFOG a court for us to hammer out disputes that otherwise would distract multiple topics? Is it a congress of users intended to advise Porfiry on our aesthetic preferences for the site? From where I sit, it looks like an open field, a blank page, whatever you want to call it. I'd much enjoy seeing folks come together and establish some advisory rules defining community sentiments regarding problematic issues. But I can't just sit here inventing issues for discussion out of my ... er ... anyway ... I can't just sit here tossing ideas off ... oh, never mind. What matters to you as a poster? What will make your time at Sciforums better? What do you want from SFOG?