One of the first ground rules of any " sensible debate" is to come to agree on the terms being used. My definition of community is far, far from the one Shambles brings to the table.

My working definition of community is based around the work of Ficino and the concept of convivium. It is not all "accepting and inclusive" which to me would best be included in a definition of anarchy. Anachry accepts barbarism. Jerry and I could probably play with these ideas for days, because our basic definitions are coming from similar places. .

"The convivium is rest from labours, release from cares and nourishment of genius; it is the demonstration of love and splendour, the food of good will, the seasoning of friendship, the leavening of grace and the solace of life… Everything should be seasoned with the salt of genius and illumined by the rays of mind and manners.""

Shambles ( or anyone else) if you want to PM me and play with the words and concepts I'd love to. But not as an attack on a fluid community that attempts to maintain humane dimensions and values. Mudcat (to me) is a "definition in process" of this model.
I will not post to this thread again, but I enjoyed the exercise.