tractatus/governance/TRA-OPS-0002-blog-editorial-guidelines-v1-0.md

# TRA-OPS-0002: Blog Editorial Guidelines v1.0

**Document ID**: TRA-OPS-0002
**Version**: 1.0
**Classification**: OPERATIONAL
**Status**: DRAFT → ACTIVE (upon Phase 2 start)
**Created**: 2025-10-07
**Owner**: John Stroh
**Review Cycle**: Quarterly
**Next Review**: 2026-01-07
**Parent Policy**: TRA-OPS-0001 (AI Content Generation Policy)

---

## Purpose

This document establishes editorial guidelines for the Tractatus Framework blog, ensuring all content (human-authored and AI-assisted) aligns with the project's mission, values, and quality standards.

## Scope

Applies to all blog content published on `agenticgovernance.digital/blog`, including:
- Technical articles
- Framework updates
- Case study analyses
- AI safety commentary
- Community contributions

---

## Editorial Mission

**Mission**: Advance AI safety through accessible, rigorous, and actionable content that demonstrates the Tractatus framework's principles in practice.

**Target Audiences**:
1. **Researchers**: Academic depth, citations, formal rigor
2. **Implementers**: Practical guides, code examples, integration patterns
3. **Advocates**: Plain language, real-world impact, policy implications

---

## Content Principles

### 1. Accuracy & Rigor
**Standard**: All factual claims must be supported by credible sources.

**Requirements**:
- Citations for all non-obvious claims
- Links to primary sources (not secondary summaries)
- Explicit acknowledgment of uncertainty ("likely," "may," "appears to")
- Corrections published prominently if errors discovered

**AI Guidance**: AI-generated content often hallucinates citations. **All citations must be manually verified by human reviewer.**

---

### 2. Accessibility
**Standard**: Content should be understandable to target audience without sacrificing accuracy.

**Requirements**:
- Define technical terms on first use
- Link to glossary for framework-specific terminology
- Provide examples for abstract concepts
- Avoid jargon unless necessary (then explain)

**Balance**: Academic rigor without academic gatekeeping.

---

### 3. Transparency
**Standard**: Readers should understand how content was created.

**Requirements**:
- AI-assisted posts labeled: "AI-Assisted, Human-Reviewed"
- Human-authored posts labeled: "Human-Authored"
- Guest posts: Author bio + disclaimer
- Sponsored content: Not allowed (ever)

**Example Attribution**:
```markdown
---
Author: John Stroh
AI-Assisted: Claude Sonnet 4.5 (topic suggestion, outline)
Human Review: 2025-10-15
Changes: Rewrote introduction, added 3 examples, verified all citations
---
```

---

### 4. Intellectual Honesty
**Standard**: Acknowledge limitations, counterarguments, and uncertainty.

**Requirements**:
- Address obvious objections to arguments
- Acknowledge when evidence is limited
- Link to opposing viewpoints (with fair summary)
- Update posts when new evidence emerges

**Tractatus Alignment**: Humility in knowledge claims (§3.1-3.9).

---

### 5. Respect & Inclusion
**Standard**: Content should be respectful, inclusive, and accessible.

**Requirements**:
- Avoid ableist, racist, sexist, or exclusionary language
- Use gender-neutral language unless referring to specific individuals
- Provide alt text for images
- Caption videos (future)
- Acknowledge diverse perspectives in AI safety (Western, non-Western, indigenous)

**Te Tiriti Alignment**: Respect Māori data sovereignty principles (reference when relevant).

---

## Content Categories

### 1. Framework Updates
**Purpose**: Announce changes to Tractatus framework (new services, governance updates)

**Format**:
- Summary of change (2-3 sentences)
- Motivation (why the change?)
- Technical details (for implementers)
- Migration guide (if breaking change)
- Discussion/feedback invitation

**Frequency**: As needed (1-2/month typical)

**Example Topics**:
- "ContextPressureMonitor v2.0: Weighted Pressure Scoring"
- "New Governance Document: TRA-OPS-0003 Media Protocol"

---

### 2. Case Study Analysis
**Purpose**: Analyze real-world AI failures through Tractatus lens

**Format**:
- Incident summary (what happened?)
- Failure mode analysis (why did it happen?)
- Tractatus mapping (which boundary was crossed?)
- Prevention strategy (how framework prevents this)
- Lessons learned

**Frequency**: 2-4/month

**Example Topics**:
- "The 27027 Incident Revisited: Instruction Persistence Failure"
- "ChatGPT Jailbreaks: Boundary Enforcement vs. Prompt Injection"

---

### 3. Technical Deep Dives
**Purpose**: Explain framework implementation details for developers

**Format**:
- Problem statement (what are we solving?)
- Architecture overview (high-level design)
- Code examples (working, tested)
- Testing strategies
- Performance considerations

**Frequency**: 1-2/month

**Example Topics**:
- "Implementing CrossReferenceValidator: Instruction Database Design"
- "BoundaryEnforcer Performance: Zero-Overhead Runtime Checks"

---

### 4. AI Safety Commentary
**Purpose**: Discuss broader AI safety issues through Tractatus perspective

**Format**:
- Current event/trend summary
- Tractatus analysis (what does framework say?)
- Broader implications
- Call to action (if appropriate)

**Frequency**: 1-2/month

**Example Topics**:
- "AGI Timelines & Tractatus: Why Architecture Matters Now"
- "EU AI Act & Boundary Enforcement: Regulatory Alignment"

---

## Writing Standards

### Style Guide

**Tone**:
- Professional but conversational
- Confident but humble
- Rigorous but accessible
- Passionate but not preachy

**Voice**:
- Active voice preferred ("We implemented..." not "It was implemented...")
- First-person plural for Tractatus team ("We believe...")
- Second-person for reader ("You can integrate...")

**Format**:
- Headings: Title Case (## This Is a Heading)
- Lists: Sentence case (- First item)
- Code: Inline `backticks`, blocks with language tags
- Emphasis: **Bold** for important, *italic* for emphasis

**Length**:
- Minimum: 500 words (short updates)
- Typical: 1000-2000 words
- Maximum: 5000 words (deep dives)

---

### Structure Template

**All posts should follow this structure**:

```markdown
# Post Title (Specific, Keyword-Rich)

**Author**: Name
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
**Reading Time**: X min (auto-calculated)
**Category**: [Framework Update | Case Study | Technical | Commentary]

## Summary (TL;DR)
2-3 sentence summary for skimmers.

## Introduction
Hook + context + thesis statement.

## Main Content
3-5 sections with descriptive headings.

## Conclusion
Key takeaways + call to action (optional).

## Further Reading
- Links to related posts
- External resources
- Framework docs

## Citations
[1] Source Title, Author, Year, URL
[2] ...

---

*AI-Assisted: [Yes/No]. Human Review: [Date].*
```

---

## AI-Assisted Content Workflow

### Topic Suggestion Phase

**AI Role**: Suggest 5-10 topics weekly based on AI safety news.

**Input to AI**:
- Recent news feed (Hacker News, arXiv, AI safety forums)
- Tractatus docs (framework context)
- Previous blog posts (avoid duplicates)

**AI Output**:
- Topic suggestions (1-sentence each)
- Relevance score (0-1)
- Target audience (researcher/implementer/advocate)
- Estimated complexity (low/medium/high)

**Human Review**:
- Select 1-3 topics for outline generation
- Reject off-brand or low-value topics
- Add topics manually if AI misses obvious ones

**SLA**: Weekly (Fridays)

---

### Outline Generation Phase

**AI Role**: Generate detailed outline for approved topics.

**Input to AI**:
- Approved topic
- Editorial guidelines (this document)
- Target audience
- Suggested length (500-5000 words)

**AI Output**:
- Title + subtitle
- Introduction outline (key points)
- 3-5 main sections (with subsections)
- Conclusion outline
- Suggested citations (to be verified)

**Human Review**:
- Verify outline structure
- Add/remove/reorder sections
- Flag any factual concerns
- Approve for human drafting

**SLA**: 48 hours

---

### Draft Writing Phase

**AI Role**: None. **Human writes the actual draft.**

**Rationale**: Blog content is STRATEGIC (editorial voice, values communication). AI can assist with structure, but human must do the writing.

**Exception**: Technical code examples may be AI-generated, but human must test and verify.

---

### Final Review Phase

**AI Role**: Optional proofreading (grammar, clarity).

**Human Role**: Final fact-check, citation verification, tone check.

**Approval**: Admin reviewer (or John Stroh for sensitive topics).

**SLA**: 24 hours before scheduled publish.

---

## Citation Standards

### Citation Format

**Use APA-lite style**:

```markdown
## Citations

[1] Wittgenstein, L. (1921). *Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus*. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. https://example.com

[2] Anthropic. (2024). Claude 3 Model Card. Retrieved from https://www.anthropic.com/claude

[3] Bostrom, N. (2014). *Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies*. Oxford University Press.
```

**In-text references**: Use superscript numbers: "As Wittgenstein argued[1], the limits of language..."

---

### Source Quality Hierarchy

**Preferred Sources**:
1. Peer-reviewed academic papers (journals, conferences)
2. Technical reports from reputable organizations (OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind)
3. Government/regulatory documents (EU AI Act, NIST guidelines)
4. Established news outlets (NY Times, Wired, Ars Technica)

**Acceptable Sources** (with caveats):
5. Blog posts from AI safety researchers (personal, but expert)
6. Social media (Twitter/X) from verified experts (screenshot + archive)

**Unacceptable Sources**:
7. Wikipedia (use as starting point, cite original sources)
8. Anonymous forums (4chan, Reddit unless verified expert)
9. AI-generated content (ChatGPT output is not a source)
10. Satirical/parody sites (The Onion, unless discussing satire)

**AI Guidance**: AI often cites sources that don't exist. **ALWAYS verify every citation manually.**

---

## Prohibited Content

**Absolutely Not Allowed**:
- Plagiarism (even with AI assistance)
- Hate speech, discrimination, harassment
- Misinformation (intentional false claims)
- Sponsored content (hidden advertising)
- Political endorsements (organizational neutrality)
- Personal attacks on individuals/organizations
- Copyright violation (images, code without permission)

**Editorial Judgment Required**:
- Controversial topics (AI risk levels, AGI timelines)
- Criticism of specific AI companies (factual, balanced)
- Speculative scenarios (clearly labeled as speculation)

---

## Comments & Community Engagement

**Phase 2**: Comments disabled initially (focus on publishing quality content).

**Phase 3**: Comments enabled with moderation.

**Social Media**: Posts shared on Twitter/X, Mastodon (future).

**Engagement Guidelines**:
- Respond to substantive questions/critiques
- Acknowledge errors promptly
- Update posts when new evidence emerges
- Link to discussions (Hacker News, LessWrong) but don't feed trolls

---

## Content Calendar

### Publishing Schedule

**Target**: 2-4 posts/month (Phase 2 soft launch)

**Days**: Tuesdays & Thursdays (10am NZT)

**Planning Horizon**: 2 weeks ahead (outline approved)

---

### Example Editorial Calendar (Phase 2 Month 1)

| Week | Topic | Category | Author | Status |
|------|-------|----------|--------|--------|
| W1 | "Introducing Tractatus Blog" | Framework Update | John | Draft |
| W1 | "The 27027 Incident" | Case Study | AI-assisted | Outline |
| W2 | "CrossReferenceValidator Deep Dive" | Technical | AI-assisted | Planned |
| W3 | "Why AI Safety Needs Architecture" | Commentary | John | Idea |
| W4 | "BoundaryEnforcer in Practice" | Technical | AI-assisted | Idea |

---

## Performance Metrics

### Success Metrics (Phase 2)

**Engagement**:
- Average readers/post: 50+ (soft launch target)
- Average reading time: >2 minutes (indicates engagement)
- Social shares: 10+ per post

**Quality**:
- Citation accuracy: 100% (zero broken/fake citations)
- Corrections rate: <5% (fewer than 1 in 20 posts need correction)
- User feedback: 4+/5 average rating (future)

**Production**:
- Publishing consistency: 8+ posts/month
- Time to publish: <7 days from outline approval
- AI approval rate: 70-90% (outlines accepted)

---

## Revision & Updates

### Post Updates

**Minor Edits** (typos, clarifications):
- Edit in place, no notification

**Factual Corrections**:
- Add correction note at top: "UPDATE (YYYY-MM-DD): Corrected claim about..."
- Strikethrough incorrect text, add correct text
- Update changelog at bottom

**Major Revisions**:
- Consider new post: "Revisiting [Topic]: What We Got Wrong"
- Link from original post

---

## Related Documents

- TRA-OPS-0001: AI Content Generation Policy (parent)
- TRA-OPS-0005: Human Oversight Requirements
- STR-VAL-0001: Core Values & Principles (sydigital)

---

## Approval

| Role | Name | Signature | Date |
|------|------|-----------|------|
| **Policy Owner** | John Stroh | [Pending] | [TBD] |
| **Technical Reviewer** | Claude Code | [Pending] | 2025-10-07 |
| **Final Approval** | John Stroh | [Pending] | [TBD] |

---

**Status**: DRAFT (awaiting John Stroh approval)
**Effective Date**: Upon first blog post publication (Phase 2)
**Next Review**: 2026-01-07