Updated Standards For We're Solving Society: We aim to deliver credible, intelligible and valuable insights. We know DV to be an enemy to overall collective comprehension, intelligibility, and self-worth. Therefore, we do not endorse it.

1. We do not accept, permit, or respect institutionalized or casual domestic violence of any sort. This includes any use of coercive control, societal or individualized, meant to force someone into a certain direction without drawing on one's powers of suggestion, spoken and written word, expressive capacity, or otherwise. We do not view domestic violence as valuable or "toughening" in any way. We view it as a damage to the nervous system that is very expensive to undo for both society and individual. We understand that this behavior is relatively hard to undo when one has a history of it, we ask, however, that you do not actively endorse it and take serious measures to end its effect on one's life. We understand and can correctly identify the threshold between insincere and sincere attempts on this matter. . We encourage anyone with a contradictory opinion to seek other assistance or employment. As part of our project, we can not validate heaping any more costs to society and individaul by participating in domestic violence. We appreciate, however, any duly expressed solutions regarding this issue. We weight these judgments for the subjection of the individual to traumatic instances of oppression such as poverty, constant harrassment, racism, voicelessness, and pathological appropriation. For instance, we would not apply much judgment on a chronically homeless individual. We would, however, apply it to an individual who abuses a vulnerable individual to make a career move when they have knowledge of alternatives and substantial means already. 2. We're solving society does not attempt to replace or mirror a court system. We are not trying to prove that any individual is innocent or guilty, we are trying to analyze the causes of the event of their oppression or lack of it within society. We advocate for just processes by the legal system, especially if it is clear there is a vulnerable individual who has been severely victimized by multiple institutions. 3. We do not validate any sort of trivialization, minimization, gaslighting, or other toxic behavior in the face of valid information about societal problems. We appreciate information from anyone who is willing to speak up in a sincere manner. We appreciate any safe exposure to these issues. We encourage those who are unwilling to face the issues inherent in society to seek other help. 4. We view financial international retaliation (for the most part) when policy is not properly discussed and the punitive justice systems as institutional domestic violence. 5. We only validate visions of truth and justice that come from qualified, unbiased, well-researched, thorough, and open positions. We do not validate knee-jerk definitions stemming from narcissism, contempt, attempts to get someone victimized without an interest in the universal principle and we certainly do not validate coercive control under the name justice. 6. We do not validate correlative procedures of justice such as "you looked like this terrorist", "you look like you're bad", "you look smart", "you don't look smart" etc. We encourage and require all hefty accusations to only come from sincere individuals who understand the difference between correlation and causation. We understand that as much as there are probabilities, there are institutions and biases that keep relatively inaccurate probabilities extant. We attempt to look at issues from all angles. 7. We acknowledge that authority has authority issues in many cases and we take this self-sabotaging fact into account. We do not validate opinions that do not validate the possibility of self-sabotage within authority. 8. We do not validate situations of entrapment meant to ensure the reputation of a person of highly respected or compensated power who made a fraudulent or inaccurate claim. 9. We encourage flexibility over rigidity in most cases. If we find sources of power that create more rapid progress for our voted-on issues, we validate those sources of power over mere lineage based power sources. We validate and apply an understanding of unforeseen effects and do not take on new risks out of a sense of sheer novelty. 10. We understand and validate that coercive control and contempt can come from any direction, any race, any gender, and any place. We prove its presence in all cases and invalidate it duly. We weight these judgments for the subjection of the individual to traumatic instances of oppression such as poverty, voicelessness, and pathological appropriation. For instance, we would not apply any judgment on a chronically homeless individual. We would, however, apply it to an individual who abuses a vulnerable individual to make a career move when they have knowledge of alternatives and substantial means already. 11. We validate that people who make better moves for themselves and others publicly and privately should be held in superior authority to those who are negligent, abusive, or have a history of harm. We acknowledge this is the basic standard of a healthy, not pathological, society. We encourage all contributers to consider their capacities for projection and to engage in due reflection to extract value from the issues they formalize. We aim to come to credible and valuable insights. 12. We do not respect fear-based knee-jerk reaction attempts to disband or terrorize us via snooping, stalking, bullying, coercing or slandering without understanding us, speaking directly to the founder or attempting to make a contribution. End of story. These slanders will be ignored and excellent work will continue to come from the talents of this world interested in helping solve their society.