CommunityOverview

Community Overview

OpenReason only works if it is genuinely open — to scrutiny, challenge, improvement, and disagreement.

How to Get Involved

Discussion & Critique

Challenge assumptions, point out gaps, question methodology. The most valuable contributions are those that find weaknesses the original authors missed.

Open an issue

Fork Documents

Disagree with an ORP document? Fork it with your own assumptions and show what the analysis looks like with different choices.

Learn how to fork →

Contribute Examples

Created an ORP-compliant document? Share it with the community as a worked example for others to learn from.

Submit your example →

Improve Tooling

Contribute to the CLI, validator, REST API, or other tools. Python and TypeScript/JavaScript developers welcome.

Development guide

Propose Extensions

Need domain-specific fields? Propose an extension for AI training data, environmental impact, healthcare policy, or other domains.

Extension guidelines →

Improve the Spec

Found a missing field, ambiguous definition, or structural improvement? Propose changes to the core specification.

Propose spec changes →

Community Principles

Challenge Ideas, Not People

Disagree with reasoning, not with identity. Be specific, be honest, be direct — and be willing to be wrong.

Clarify, Don’t Obscure

The only contribution that is not welcome is one that obscures rather than clarifies — that adds complexity without purpose, or asserts without reasoning.

Fork Freely

You don’t need permission to fork an ORP document. It’s an inherent right under the protocol. If you disagree with assumptions, fork it and show your alternative.

Transparency Applies to Governance

The protocol itself is governed transparently using ORP principles. See our Governance page for how decisions are made.

Current Status

Phase: Phase 0 → Phase 1 transition Protocol Version: ORP v0.1 Tooling Version: v0.3.0 (PyPI), v0.4.0 (REST API)

See our Roadmap for what’s coming next.

Code of Conduct

OpenReason exists to improve the quality of public reasoning. Contributions should reflect that purpose.

We value:

  • Rigorous challenge
  • Transparent reasoning
  • Honest acknowledgment of uncertainty
  • Constructive disagreement

We don’t tolerate:

  • Personal attacks
  • Arguments from authority without reasoning
  • Deliberate obscurity or bad-faith critique
  • Harassment or discrimination

Need Help?

  • Technical questions: Open an issue on GitLab
  • Protocol questions: Read the specification or ask on GitLab
  • Governance questions: See Governance page
  • General inquiries: Contact via GitLab issues

Ready to contribute? Start with our Contributing Guide →