Every Member Has Two Roles in the Commune—When You Think a Policy Is Unfair...

The first role is that of contributor.

The second role is that of recipient.

When considering Commune policies, you should think from both perspectives.

For example, the Commune has a one-year waiting period and a one-year transition period; from these two perspectives there are two views. As a contributor, you want strictness to ensure your money is not scammed; as a recipient, you want laxness so you can get the money.

Another example: failing to fulfill obligations means being expelled from the Commune; from the two perspectives there are again two views. As a contributor, you want laxness so as not to lose your qualification; as a recipient, you want strictness to ensure sufficient fundraising.

Another example: strict review of recipients—as a contributor you support it, as a recipient you are unhappy about it.

When you feel a policy is unreasonable, try considering it from the other role; perhaps you can then understand the Commune's policy. There is also another angle: the platform merely matches people; it cannot benefit from denying or granting claims. When you think a policy is unfair, consider: who benefits from that unfairness?