Who is considered a Novice, Advocate, Elected official or Head of department? Firstly there needs to be a founding manifesto or constitution for the community, in this document there will be certain definitions of the methods, processes, time periods and criteria by which members are eligible to be elected to positions of administration. It will also contain the general classifications of hierarchy and structure within the community.

There needs to be special consideration here on abilities within a given discipline, an advanced level computer scientist may well be a novice in the field of biology, ergo each title should be suffixed or prefixed with the relevant field. Perhaps even following the example of the gradient of martial arts where every member has an appropriate level of kyu or dan that gives them a clear indication of where they rest on the scale of their art.

There are other questions relating to this one, the ultimate basis for level of skill will be based on assessment and practical experience, vocation and practical application should be seen as equally if not more important than theory. There should also be some recognition of skills attained prior to joining the community. But these should only allow a fast track out of novice lessons they shouldn’t grant anyone status by default.

Presently my thought was this; all members start as novices considered equals in the community, over the next 6 months they will learn basic chores and depending on their assessments assigned to levels of learning with classes, professors, mentors etc.

They will be assessed on their abilities in all the primary sciences, computer programming, mathematics, fitness and co-ordination, the martial art decided on for the community, creativity, logical reasoning, emotional intelligence and potentially more. The purpose is to find out what the member can do and what their passion is that can help them drive the community.

People will remain a novice until they attain a sufficient comprehension of the basic fields of scientific enquiry, reason, teaching e.t.c. It’s very possible different communities may have different requirements. But once the understanding of all the basic foundations are met they can then choose, with advice and consultation from their peers to become an Advocate of a specific sphere of science [initially I thought the community would be completely focused on the natural sciences and technology however there is merit in thinking that any discipline followed would result in benefits to the community it rests in].

The difference between an Advocate and a Novice then is; Firstly, an Advocate has reached a fundamental understanding of the all the base sciences, basic vocational skills, dialogue techniques, fitness and martial skill. Secondly, the Advocate by his very title has decided what he will dedicate the rest of his time/life in the community towards.

Elected officials and administration come from the pool of people who have passed the assessment phase if deemed sufficiently capable. Although the criteria of who is eligible should depend on the position being voted for. Obviously the head of a physics department should be considered to have a sound, if not advanced, knowledge of the subject of the department he is running.

More details on differing titles within the community should be discussed in later entries.


On the matter of health, all community members should be trained in basic first and and long-term members should strive to be paramedics or at least aware of more advanced lifesaving procedures. All members, with the physical ability to do so, should regularly donate blood for the community, society at large, and for fellow members in the case of an emergency.


An additional point on ‘security’ and enforcement of rules, if there are to be security members they should be formally trained, qualified in restraint and the civil laws of the country in the best methods to catch and isolate individuals who are both a danger to themselves and others.


Who is responsible for resolving disputes between members of the community? Disputes fall under a number of categories, physical disputes where members are involved in actual physical aggression should be stopped by all members present or a call could be made to security or failing that the local authorities. In such cases civil law will take over if the parties wish to place charges.

In social disputes they will take the form of a public dialogue which should occur with each of the members (or groups of members) debating and discussing their viewpoint and a selection of their peers voting to decide upon the acceptable or correct viewpoint.

Finally in the case of scientific disputes one should follow the facts as far as one can and the criticism should be followed in public peer review journals.


Who is responsible for the safety well being and health of the members of the community?
There is a large difference between ‘safety’ and ‘health’ but we can take from this a number of different perspectives. Firstly, workplace safety should adhere to the strictest levels possible irrelevant of the health and safety standards of the host country, Members of in England should receive the same safety regulations as those working in India, safety of the individual is paramount.

Outside of a work environment there should be some understanding of self-accountability and responsibility, if you trip on the stairs and hurt yourself or place yourself in a position that results in an act of carelessness leading to harm it is not the fault of the community for not telling you to watch your feet. Thus, while some procedures (such as lab work e.t.c) must drawn up carefully in case of complaint it should assume that every member is a functioning, reasoning human being and not incapable of observing the obvious.

As for health there is a huge number of definitions for what being ‘healthy’ is and likewise there are a number of different people involved; cooks and chefs are responsible for nutritional and dietary health, insuring that nobody with an allergy is adversely affected, while physical trainers or sensei are concerned with the muscle, cardio and must also be aware of their students abilities and medical conditions. Waivers and insurance in the case of martial arts are likely to be mandatory as they are in many industrialised nations. Being physically active as possible is a cornerstone of motivation, preparedness, regular sleep patterns, mental stability, cognitive enhancement and health just as much as diet is. The community mandates these things for the benefit of the individual certainly not for the ease of organisation or administration.

Finally there is the case of safety and well-being, if you want to feel safe it should be due to a community wide mentality of behaving correctly, not a select number of enforcers. Every member is autonomous unit with martial training and taught responsibility and accountability. If you see a fight between members and don’t act then you are responsible for acting to stop it. Maybe via calling for aid, or if confident getting involved but you have a responsibility to act as strong as the instigators responsibility for throwing the first punch.

In short every member is responsible for their health, safety and well-being and they should also feel that they are just as responsible to every other human being as well.


Who decides the initial ‘rules’ of the community? The rules in this context can be considered the regulations, procedures and systems that are put in place to allow the smooth running of the community. It is implicit that these rules should not run counter to the legal framework of the country the community resides in, or international law. However, it is possible the community may break with cultural or religious traditions and ideologies of its host country, but once again only if it remains within the civil laws of the country.

Rules should not be made for every misdemeanour if you have a lot of rules it is because the individual is corrupt, inept or utterly unable to be autonomous. The more laws we have the more it shows the lack of discipline, empathy, character and common decency of the individual, which is exactly what we are trying to develop in the citizens of this community.

As mentioned in such entries as 9, 17, 21, 25 (and others) there are two forms of regulation Internal (moral) and External (enforced) we should always attempts to build on the former so that the latter becomes more unnecessary.

Obviously as the scientific method shows us, and some glaring examples of modern nations, laws can become stagnant and redundant in the light of new evidence and changes in the understanding of our world. In this viewpoint new technologies and changing understanding of the mind can effect ethical issues and processes  that were once thought to be fundamentally necessary.

Ultimately then the ‘rules’ that are written must be subject to change irrelevant of who wrote them initially, as humans are fallible and inherently prone to error. Initially, there should be a regular weekly discussion of the rules and processes by the founding members that should take place in the form of a dialogue whereby two independent groups tackle the same rules system (on the same subject). After a set of rules has been decided on by the two independent groups they come together and discuss and defend their solutions. Once the discussion is complete there will be a vote requiring a 2/3 majority for the ‘rules’ or ‘process’ to be accepted.

After all the various moral laws and enforced regulations and guidelines are decided on they should be recorded and followed for a significant period of time (upward of a year at the very least). At which point the process begins again from scratch.

Rule generating committees should  be created at random with lots with any full-time member of the community viable to be chosen. This avoids stacked communities and avoids more complicated electoral processes. A group of officials should also be selected to become intimately familiar with the rules to help with regulatory decisions or disputes (see later) of misconduct. This committee  will also be selected at random and have the same lifespan as the rules.

The officials who are intimately familiar with the rules should be present and participate in the debates forming the new set of rules once the older regulations reach the end of their allotted tenure. This is due to the fact that they will be considered experts; however, while they may debate the merits or flaws of rules used in the prior period they have no voting power on the new set of rules, they are in effect present purely for experienced input and insight.

It should be obvious from the above but even the rules, procedures and regulations outlined in this document are also subject to dismissal and change. They are simply explorations and thoughts into the way such a community could work.


The Student; While in the entries so far the community has been seen as a replacement for the work life space it is an equally viable environment for higher education. Now while this might not be immediately viable, eventually the community could open its doors to students. But rather than a typical academic approach to education, relying on theory primarily and standardized testing, it would be a vocational and practical approach, giving instructions in lab techniques, programming open source systems, teaching, research aid, data analysis e.t.c. The aim is to to provide practical beneficial skills with tangible applications first and teach the theory alongside this experience where applicable.

The reasons for joining the community under these circumstances are clear to anyone leaving education with savings rather than debt, with practical work experience and qualifications, a good physical condition, general public and debating skills and a great improvement in personal development, finances e.t.c. This would surely be both a benefit to both the student and any future employer.


The unemployed for obvious reasons a year in the community would be a remarkably good stepping stone the unemployed. Everyone willing to work and progress could leave with some savings and obtain skills + accreditations to help them if and when they decide to leave the community.


The late realizer; There those of us who very late in higher education, later during their career or even later still when nearing retirement that they actually have  a deep interest or love towards science and research. In such a situation if they aren’t rich it is exceedingly difficult to change ones course in life. To retrain ones skills, to put aside potentially years of effort in another domain of study. There are the issues of age, status, children all of which can be factors which make it hard to justify the change.

Many companies nowadays allow for sabbaticals or prolonged breaks. If your company doesn’t allow this one could consider that a period within the community will leave with more experience than when you entered. The opportunity to join the community should never be taken away from an individual, although due to size constraints and numbers of members there might be a waiting list. An alternative might be a layperson position where one is actively involved with helping the community while remaining in their current position.

The community exists to educate, to improve, to research, to develop. Thus for those looking to forge a new path in the sciences, research or technology it is a logical place to come. There is no idea of necessary entry requirements per se and the only immediate issue might be life obligations that continue while you are involved (i.e. bills, accommodation, e.t.c.).