If the other group or community is, as you say, much worse than it could be, helping to improve it from the inside makes things better for the people already involved, while going and starting your own group might leave them in the lurch.
Sure. When everyone (or at least a majority) in the initial group are on board with your reform efforts, you should often try to reform the group. But very often there will be a conflict of visions or a conflict of interests.
In general I think you should probably at least initially try to reform things, though if it doesn’t work well there’s a point where you might have to say “sorry, the time has come, we’re making our own group now”.
I certainly agree with this, though it seems plausible that we have different views of the point at which you should switch to the “found a splinter group” strategy.
Sure. When everyone (or at least a majority) in the initial group are on board with your reform efforts, you should often try to reform the group. But very often there will be a conflict of visions or a conflict of interests.
I certainly agree with this, though it seems plausible that we have different views of the point at which you should switch to the “found a splinter group” strategy.