Task forces burned out IMHO

I feel several proposals have been unjustly overlooked because they were repeatedly excluded in a manner contrary to the stated process rules. Moreover, the recommendations which were approved are not coherent because they in many cases are not operational things to do. Many of them are merely platitudes or abstract wishes without any clear path to implementation. They are also not supported by evidence: There is no way to tell whether the approved proposals are any more likely to have a positive impact than those which were discarded because they were unpopular with the facilitators or the few vocal editors with the perennial axe to grind against anonymous contributions.

It seems to me that at least one of the facilitators is more willing to contradict longstanding Foundation policy than consider the possibility that he may have been wrong to do so.