.



The site recognizes four classifications of candidates and public officials:

• Mission Supporting – candidates / public officials that support our Mission, as determined by the sites official evaluation process.
• Not Evaluated - candidates / public officials that have not been evaluated though the sites official evaluation process.
• Defensive / Strategic Purpose - candidates / public officials that do not optimally reflect the sites Mission but are projected to bring a net-positive value to our Mission vs. other possible outcomes, as determined by the sites official evaluation process.
• Non-Supporting - candidates / public officials that:
o Are destructive or otherwise non-supportive of our Mission.
o Do not optimally reflect the sites Mission; are projected to bring a net-loss to our Mission, as determined by the sites official evaluation process.

The manner in which non-Mission Supporting candidates can be supported is limited to be in-line with the sites Mission.



Not Evaluated
Candidates and public officials need to be vetted though the sites evaluation process before being promoted in a significant manner. Promotions should focus to get others involved in the vetting process. You can request to initiate an official evaluation by contacting the site staff.



Defensive / Strategic Purpose
Candidates / public officials that have been evaluated as “Defensive / Strategic Purpose” are limited as follows:
Only limited efforts to promote the candidate / public official are permissible. This includes efforts to rally other supporters, attempting to convert members, raise funds, rallying delegates, sharing information that would only be important for supporters and the like.



Non-Supporting
Candidates / public officials that have been evaluated as “Non-Supporting” are limited as follows:

The following is Not Acceptable:
• Any effort to promote the candidate / public officials is not within the site Guidelines, per “No promoting agendas that counter our Mission”. This includes efforts to rally other supporters, attempting to convert members, raise funds, rallying delegates, sharing information that would only be important for supporters and the like.
• Thread title should not suggest that the candidate / public official is being promoted, even when that title is used elsewhere. Example “Why I support < candidate / public official>”.


The following will have Limited Acceptance, as specified:
• General supportive statements of the candidate / public official should be limited and should pertain to an ongoing discussion. Supportive statements include offering praise, making favorable comparisons to other candidates / public officials and the like; supportive statements should focus on a specific policy element.
• Posting third party material (such as articles or videos) that promote the candidate / public official is permissible for the purpose of critically analyzing the piece, including highlighting misrepresentations, elements that do not support our Mission and the like. If a thread is started with such material, all discussion should be geared towards this purpose.
• Speculative positive claims about what a candidate / public official will do in the future should be clearly marked as speculative, and be avoided.



Always Acceptable for All Candidates / Public Officials
The following elements are Acceptable for all candidates / public officials within standard site limits:
• Critical analysis, either favorable or not, about a specific policy that a candidate / public official holds.
• Discussion on the pros and cons of the tactics used by a candidate / public official.
• Supporting, enhancing and leveraging specified elements that a candidate / public official is engaged in that advance our Mission.
• News or mainstream polls on any candidate / public official. News is defined as the coverage of events, not opinion pieces.
• Communications from a candidate / campaign / public official, including press releases and social media messages.
• Correcting any type of false information against a candidate / campaign / public official.
• Declarations of support for any candidate / public official.



Suggested Best Practices
When supporting, enhancing and leveraging specified elements that a “Non-Supporting” candidate / public official is engaged in, it is best to frame the discussion around that specific issue and avoid commentary that can be viewed as supportive of that candidate / public official.



Being Respectful
• Members should show respect for the decisions of other members selection of candidates and pubic officials.
• The use of ad hominems against a candidate / pubic official support group should be avoided.