Addressing disruptive (or harmful) anti-sematics

Its come to my mindfulness; that the ability to triage disruptive
anti-semantics is important to maintain safety with respect to the 'lived
experiences', circumstances (ie: employers & linked rules); and broadly,
conditions upon which, people are able to contribute.

this intrinsically denotes other broader legal rules
about responsibilities; whether they be 'secrets acts' or role define (ie:
agents of an independent legal personality) implications, constraints;
semantically definable aspects that have influence upon a means to form
quorum; etc...

so, i put it to the group; that a triage method should be sought, to figure
out 'what that means'.

for instance; i admire (greatly) the US copyright clause[1] but i am not a
US citizen[2].

As an AU citizen (only has ~25m people) doesn't mean alot re: 7.8Bn people
in the world; i still (as an AU citizen) think, the deliberation and/or
structural means for redress is important; which is why i spent so many
years working on a solution, as noted here[3] in the interests of doing
good work, without being required to be disassociative[4].

FWIW; I think a 'good model', will attract a luminary capability of fairly
incredible, multidisciplinary contributors; to produce a certain kind of
'ecosystem outcome', whereby their contributions should (theoretically) be
denoted as 'useful works', etc.

which in-turn has very positive 'risk' implications' for those who 'need'
to do it, anyhow.

Regards,

Timothy Holborn.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(law)
[3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2021May/0167.html
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissociative_identity_disorder