As I am writing this, it has been 45 days since the 2021 Community Check-in. Many of the answers identify observed site trends, with scores indicating community agreement with those observations.
So what do we do now? I think many of the observations made warrant further exploration, but I'm not sure what that looks like.
To be clear, this is not the place to discuss those observations, rather a place to brainstorm what those discussions should look like.
If you want to address a specific point from the check-in, you would open a Meta discussion on that specific point. With an eye towards what would be different about your new Meta if one exists on the same topic already (and it almost inevitably does).
I started writing a comment and then found it got too long.
I'll bow and take blame for it going somewhat unsaid and ambiguous, but I (subconsciously) assumed that most of the ongoing process is covered by a norms, but let's put some words on the specific details.
There's no defined process specifically for the community check in. Normal users are able, allowed, and encouraged to raise discussions to try to solve issues, and the community check-in tries to help that mostly by getting things identified, but also tries to identify things which don't translate into full discussions. Either it's highlighting something positive, something that's just informative to keep in the back of our minds, or something intangible. But if anyone has a good idea for how to start a discussion regarding one of the things raised they should do so. The wording in the check-in post is trying to get those started rather than (too much) effort being misplaced in the respective comment threads.
And at least in my experience, getting things voiced so it can rattle in someone else's brain for them to start the discussion can be of great use. Maybe they have an idea, the frame or perspective to start the discussion or suggestion that will bear fruit.
And I'd like to cover another point which spring to mind here regarding the use of "we" and moderation team. I'll fully acknowledge it being ambiguous, at least for this case it is intended to be inclusive, meaning we the community. Moderators wear many hats, and the relevant here is Community Leader, but that hat is not exclusive to us. Taking part of meta, and especially starting (constructively and in my preference neutrally) discussions is wearing that hat.
To quote the check in itself:
This post isn't the place to workshop solutions - if a particular problem gets a lot of votes, we should open a new meta question to do justice to that issue. Solutions hidden in a comment thread on one of these answers can not be clearly vetted and voted on, so they will tend to remain undone.
A problem or trend that has some sort of actionable resolution should have a Meta opened to brainstorm possible solutions and have those proposals voted upon.
If the thing worth noting is just some trend, then perhaps a Meta long the lines of "What can we do about X trend?" Or "Is X trend a bad thing that we need to fix?" would work well.
There is no one way to go about the host of situations that we have identified in an actionable way. If somebody or a group of people take the task upon themselves to create an/ actionable item/s, it is on them. The community check-in is a snapshot, not a todo-list.
Some people have already started to act during the nomination phase, and we do so by utilising the usual site features. If you want to discuss a particular issue, then you can use the appropriate venues.
Any such discussion is a regular discussion. People involved may or may not reference the snapshot.
