Edit: spoiler'd the above because it was a bad reference (since the UN is still just a select few sorta), but I'll keep it there so people can read if they want
While I agree with your message about something that "re-shapes" xat shouldn't be just limited to a select few, it's easier to say "hear the many" than to actually take into account the voice of every single person.
For example, a way this is solved is by one person (contributor, volunteer, chat manager, simple dude whose respected, etc.) being the voice for a larger number of people or community that they represent. (could be split by language, official chat categories, official chats in general, etc, etc. idk)
I know my analogies are not be the best and I could just be plain wrong, but honestly while most may be against it, having a just a few people make decisions isn't that bad, and it's easier for the opinion of the majority of the few to be heard than trying to account for the opinions of the many.
Like if it wasn't just an "invite only" group, but if something could be figured out sort of like how U.S. Senators work? Like a "vote" thing (idk, still bad, since people can just mass vote their friends, but maybe having "terms" would be a little better instead of the same people being in there all the time)??? At least in my state (Minnesota) the senators actually listen to things that the people want (the people of the state they represent, not much outside) and then bring it up higher.
Contributors doesn't have to be abolished, just redone.
(easy to say but pointless if there's no plan of what to do afterward.
pls don't hate on my united states references but I'm not super familiar with how other countries work in their entirety.
also i'm not asserting that what I'm saying is a good idea, just something I thought of)
Any comments would be appreciated??? i guess