Countries, societies and clubs have constitutions. Why not stackexchange?
Over the last several months we've seen stackexchange "the company" use/abuse power, push/disrespect boundaries, cause community unrest and backlash and finally lawyer up (how sad).
I feel the turmoil occurred in part because there's no clear understanding, internally and externally, of those powers/boundaries are.
But what are the boundaries, exactly? What rights and obligations, if any, do the various types of people (visitors, users, moderators, employees, management, owners, etc) involved in the organization have?
A constitution embodies the definition of such concepts.
Should stakexchange have one, call it that, publish it and live by it?
Note: This goes beyond a revamped moderator agreement. This is about everyone.
Given recent communications and decisions made by Stack Overflow management, needless to say the constitution would be toothless unless it nominated an independent body to resolve disputes, which would specifically exclude courts (even though suing seems to be a national sport of the US, second only in popularity to playing the “credit score” game) because getting a fair result should not depend on how deep ones pockets are, and which may include the collective community voting to determine the outcome, or selecting jurors from the community.