|
| 1 | +# Ethosism Governance |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +This document defines the first public governance layer for Ethosism: how canon, practice, Ethra terms, and community use change without losing coherence. |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +## Authority Layers |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +1. Canon: source texts in `books/` and the core Ethos chapters. |
| 8 | +2. Practice: worksheets, scripts, session formats, and applied guides in `practice/`. |
| 9 | +3. Language: Ethra specs, corpus, lexicon, dictionary, style, and governance files in the Ethra repository. |
| 10 | +4. Publication: website, print outputs, release packets, and handoff evidence. |
| 11 | +5. Local use: study groups, households, facilitators, and institutions applying the material. |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +Lower layers may adapt to context, but they must not contradict higher layers without proposing a change. |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +## Change Status |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +Every substantive proposal should be labeled with one of these statuses. |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +- Draft: private or early work, not relied on publicly. |
| 20 | +- Proposed: ready for review against canon, evidence, and practice use. |
| 21 | +- Experimental: usable in bounded trials with clear review criteria. |
| 22 | +- Accepted: incorporated into the relevant source of truth. |
| 23 | +- Deprecated: retained for history but no longer recommended. |
| 24 | +- Rejected: reviewed and declined with reasons. |
| 25 | + |
| 26 | +## Canon Changes |
| 27 | + |
| 28 | +Canon changes require: |
| 29 | + |
| 30 | +1. A statement of the problem. |
| 31 | +2. The affected files and passages. |
| 32 | +3. The proposed replacement. |
| 33 | +4. Reasoning from Ethosism principles. |
| 34 | +5. Expected practical consequences. |
| 35 | +6. Compatibility notes for related books and practice materials. |
| 36 | +7. A review record. |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | +No canon change should be accepted merely because it sounds better. It must clarify truth, duty, consequence, repair, formation, or stewardship. |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | +## Practice Changes |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +Practice changes require: |
| 43 | + |
| 44 | +1. A concrete use case. |
| 45 | +2. A failure mode the practice addresses. |
| 46 | +3. A short version usable by newcomers. |
| 47 | +4. Boundaries and referral conditions. |
| 48 | +5. A feedback method. |
| 49 | + |
| 50 | +Practices should be small enough to complete, specific enough to review, and humble enough to revise. |
| 51 | + |
| 52 | +## Ethra Term Governance |
| 53 | + |
| 54 | +Ethra terms should be governed as part of the language project, not improvised by popularity. |
| 55 | + |
| 56 | +Term proposals should include: |
| 57 | + |
| 58 | +- English field or concept. |
| 59 | +- Proposed kind: root, derived term, compound, particle, register rule, corpus entry, or style rule. |
| 60 | +- Domain and register. |
| 61 | +- Components and etymology. |
| 62 | +- Example sentence. |
| 63 | +- Cultural function. |
| 64 | +- Collision check against existing roots, compounds, and terms. |
| 65 | +- Review outcome. |
| 66 | + |
| 67 | +The Ethra CLI already supports governed term proposal packets. Web-facing proposal forms should collect the same information before a term enters review. |
| 68 | + |
| 69 | +## Community Governance |
| 70 | + |
| 71 | +Local groups and facilitators may host study, practice, service, and repair sessions. They may not claim ownership of Ethosism, invent binding doctrine, require confession, sell spiritual authority, or override professional/legal/medical processes. |
| 72 | + |
| 73 | +Facilitators are responsible for: |
| 74 | + |
| 75 | +1. Clear session boundaries. |
| 76 | +2. Text-grounded interpretation. |
| 77 | +3. Non-coercive participation. |
| 78 | +4. Protection of private information. |
| 79 | +5. Referral out when a matter exceeds the group's competence. |
| 80 | +6. Transparent correction when they mislead, overreach, or mishandle harm. |
| 81 | + |
| 82 | +## Versioning |
| 83 | + |
| 84 | +Use semantic language for public releases even when the repository itself has ordinary Git history. |
| 85 | + |
| 86 | +- Major: changes that alter doctrine, canon structure, or governance authority. |
| 87 | +- Minor: new books, practices, Ethra domains, or public workflows. |
| 88 | +- Patch: corrections, clarifications, links, metadata, and non-doctrinal edits. |
| 89 | + |
| 90 | +Each public release should identify the canon commit, website commit, Ethra version if relevant, and any practice/governance changes. |
| 91 | + |
| 92 | +## Review Questions |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | +Before accepting an ecosystem change, ask: |
| 95 | + |
| 96 | +1. Does this make reality easier to see? |
| 97 | +2. Does this clarify duty rather than hide it? |
| 98 | +3. Does this reduce avoidable harm? |
| 99 | +4. Does this improve repair when harm occurs? |
| 100 | +5. Does this preserve memory across time? |
| 101 | +6. Does this resist personality cults, coercion, and vague self-help drift? |
0 commit comments