Trustees debate limits on Engage DeForest forum after high‑volume threads; resolution fails for lack of motion

Staff presented a draft policy that would limit or remove the forum (threaded comment/upvote/downvote) feature on the village’s Engage DeForest site after earlier large comment volumes on some topics. The presenter said the forum feature "is a reply comment and reply upvote, downvote style engagement feature that allows users to post comments, reply directly to comments, add upvotes, downvotes, post anything, and it is publicly available." He reviewed three options for the board: keep the feature as‑is (with third‑party moderation), adopt a limited flat/comment‑only format that forwards comments privately to staff, or disable the forum entirely.

Trustees and staff debated transparency versus liability. Legal counsel warned about viewpoint discrimination and the legal consequences of selectively publishing or removing user posts, arguing that if the village publishes user comments on its site it may be required to publish all of them and cannot pick winners and losers. Staff and several trustees favored keeping engagement channels while adjusting parameters; others pressed for more controls or a staffing model to handle moderation and summarizing large comment volumes. The item did not receive a motion and the resolution failed for lack of a mover; staff will proceed with the board’s informal direction to consider a flat (non‑threaded) option and to study implementation logistics.