Lunar Mission One is a fascinating project. The efforts to include the general public into the mission are setting new standards. However, placing a time capsule on the south pole of the moon has some implications which might not yet have been properly considered:

1. Placing a time capsule on the south pole of the moon is meaning to erect a gravestone for mankind. It is well possible that western culture will sooner or later extinct itself from the planet, for example by nuclear or biological weapons, by global ecological damage or by unforeseeable effects of innovations in fields such as nanotechnology or artificial intelligence. A time capsule surviving such kind of catastrophe can tell a story about our capabilities to foresee the catastrophy and about our failure to prevent it. Who is authorised to compose an according message and what exactly would we like to tell? Several centuries ago the Rapa Nui people set up hundreds of massive stone sculptures on Easter Island. Huge amounts of wood have been necessary to transport the sculptures. When the last tree was fallen, the natural resources of the island have been destroyed and the culture vanished in few decades. The Moai sculptures are still standing as silent witnesses of this catastrophe. Will we just leave the trash of our culture on the moon or will we leave a memorial for future civilisations as the Rapa Nui people did with their sculptures? A debate about the message on our gravestone is likely to create awareness for ecological threats and might contribute to the protection of both our species and the whole ecosphere.

2. Placing a time capsule on the south pole of the moon is an attempt to communicate with extraterrestrial intelligence. To the best of our knowledge our planet will keep on turning around the sun for billions of years. Given such a long period of time it is well possible that an extraterrestrial civilisation might come along our solar system. Or it may happen that millions of years after mankind another intelligent species will evolve on earth. Such species would certainly deserve the term "alien" compared with us: Alien visitors do not necessarily have to come from far away. They can also come from long ago. No matter which way they come, they might be aware that the poles of the moon are a natural place to search for deposits of a former civilisation in our solar system. What should we tell them? I think it is important to include cultural scientists and philosophers when dealing with this issue. This is already the case in the SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) project. And it should also be the case for Lunar Mission One: Who is authorised to speak for mankind? And which kind of message would we like to compose?

For these reasons I would heavily propose to include a team of philosophers, cultural scientists, historians and anthropologists into the project. I am not sure if these disciplines are reasonably represented among the current directors, advisors, programme managers, specialists and educators of Lunar Mission One.

Summing up: Lunar Mission One is touching questions about the fate of humankind and could inspire fruitful political and philosophical debates. However this potential appears not yet to be reasonably represented in the project.

Hi Bernd Pröschold, I couldn't agree more. The Lunar Mission One Archive is a fabulous opportunity to leave a record of our world at this time, and in particular about humanity. Unfortunately Lunar Mission One haven't defined the criteria of content choice for the archive despite some valuable contributions from the community:

lunarmissionone.com/forum/public-archive.html

Like you I believe the archive is an invaluable opportunity to leave a mark of how humans understand and relate to one another and the world. I'll repeat my points here as they're easily missed among the noise of so many contributions:

What will be the principles of inclusion and exclusion of content on the Public Archive?
How might an "archival constitution" be arrived at? Through voting? Who votes? By what other means?
Who decides on and authors the final draft of public archival principles?
Who makes content editorial decisions? Paid staff? Partner experts from educational institutions? Members of the community?
How important is it to ensure those who decide on content for the public archive are representative of an international community?
How does the project ensure the content in the Public Archive is not culturally biased? Is this inevitable and why does this matter?
Will those making editorial choices about what is included (or not) be accountable?
If so, what are the mechanisms of accountability?
When there are disputes about content, how will they be dealt with?
What defines "the right balance of content"? - scientific, cultural, etc. Here's how Wikipedia organize their portals:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Contents/Portals

There are many ways to report the same event. How will these different perspectives be presented in the Public Archive?
Will the archive be family friendly?
If the archive has explicit content, who will judge what is acceptable and what is not?
Who is the final arbiter of content? The Director of the Public Archive of a senior archive group? If so, who chooses these, and what are the checks and balances that ensure the archive truly represents the views of the agreed criteria?
And so on, and so forth...

Unfortunately Lunar Mission One have not entered the conversation which you, I and others have begun. It's time they address these issues with the community...