The community has been experiencing an increase in "spam" messages on the governance forum, particularly those related to asset listing or Network candidature. This concern was raised by MarcZeller, who emphasized the importance of maintaining the forum for constructive discussions and not just as a platform for noise. He proposed a moderation policy to remove low-value replies, but also invited community feedback on this policy, stating that consensus will define the policy¹.

The proposed moderation policy received support from Fig, who agreed with MarcZeller's stance. He acknowledged that while the influx of new users indicates community passion and strength, it doesn't often contribute to meaningful feedback or constructive discussions. However, he also emphasized the need to keep the forum as open and accessible as possible².

In conclusion, the community is considering a moderation policy to maintain the quality of discussions on the governance forum. The policy, which is open to community feedback, aims to balance the need for constructive discussions with the importance of keeping the forum accessible to all users.