I totally get that you may feel frustrated to hear this, but let me clarify that:
The only open remark wrt the discord channel you suggested is not the question if, but how, so it’s purpose. Your initial suggestion included a Discord channel as an additional place to discuss governance which creates problems of collective attention which we’ve discussed at length in your thread. I’m waiting for alignment to adapt the purpose accordingly.
The Guardians Telegram chat, from the beginning, does not serve the purpose of introducing an alternative place to the forum to discuss governance.
We can have as many informal, non-official channels as we want. In fact I’m sure that across SafeDAO token holders, there are many communication channels that nobody knows of where SafeDAO topics are being discussed. The point is that they’re informal, not lead to any binding decisions and must not contain information required to comprehend the decision making process leading up to a SafeDAO proposal.
Let’s move this back to its thread if you don’t mind but IMO it’s just about specifying it’s purpose accordingly, since „ad-hoc governance discussions“ can be taken as misleading. The phrasing from above could serve as a template?