individuals make decisions, not groups. Since your decisions are based on your views, make sure they are anti-fragile. It means that your views will only change and evolve as you discuss them with more and more people.

Does legibility necessarily imply antifragility?

This is a key issue. My research is about the relationship of mutual modification between communities and digital artifacts to bootstrap empowering dynamics.

The question regarding participation could be addressed by making an infrastructural transposition (putting what is in the background in the foreground as suggested by Susan Leigh Star). This has been, in a sense the approach of this article, making visible what is behind infrastructures like LAMP, GitHub or StackExchange and has also been the approach of my comments. Of course there are things beyond infrastructure, but the way the infrastructures determine communities and the change that communities can made or not on them could be a key to antifragile, that is traversed by critical pedagogy, community and cognition. How can we change the artifacts that change us is a questions related with antifragile. This is the question of my research (in the context of a Global South hackerspace), but I never connected it with antifragile until reading this text.