> The primary question is that who is deciding that what kind of information is curated and whether the arguments have been properly voted, and the process itself is transparent.
You already seem aware of the existence of the meta site - which contains reams of useful information and prior discussion and explanation of policy - so I assume you are simply complaining about others disagreeing with you, rather than genuinely wondering.
I am not attacking you; I am questioning your bona fides. I didn't link you because you have already demonstrated awareness of the only reasonable links to give you in context.
You already seem aware of the existence of the meta site - which contains reams of useful information and prior discussion and explanation of policy - so I assume you are simply complaining about others disagreeing with you, rather than genuinely wondering.