To play devil's advocate, "safeguarding" is imho still reducible: We have to define what we're actually safeguarding:
One of the chief purposes of the offsite-forum (as opposed to the RMB) is structured and long-term communication. The community thrives best when this offsite forum remains consistent beyond the reign of the current delegate.
Since the status of a forum as the "official" forum is derived from its placement in the WFE, it is on the delegate to grant (or rather cement) this status.
Therefore, we need ways to ensure the consistency of the forum - this is where the safeguarding comes in.
One way is to give the legitimacy of the forum a certain inertia, that will protect it against a potential new delegate's desire to demote it. As far as the game is concerned, if Shoeless Joe or any of the "rogue" delegates before him had succeeded, he would have been the legitimate delegate and we would be a group of people whining on what used to be the official forum of TNP. What prevented this was our willingness to say: This delegate is a "rogue"; his power in the game is held "illegitimately"; we will strive to oust him. This inertia will also be an incentive for a delegate to stick to the forum.
In part, this is helped by having a written constitution - but that just acts like a fortification. What is really needed is a live community. There's a tautology there - the community must safeguard the community - but that's how inertia works.
Once we've established that the forum is there for the community to communicate, and the community's job is to safeguard the forum, then we can see that the forum helps provide another thing: Structure, and ways for the delegate to actually do some delegating - appointing ministers to keep track of various subjects, following the will of the inhabitants of the region (via a body of legislature) and interacting with other regions. Etc.
