I tried signing up immediately when this was posted 12 days ago. I haven't received a response, but this is likely because of the way I responded to the absurd vetting questions which paradoxically are more likely to filter out passionate writers in favor of people who spend all of their energy on "deepities" and petty writing conceits such as "writing is life!" and "writing is a way for the universe to describe itself".

But what can you expect when you force potential entrants to project the group's needs by claiming that anyone interested "must be passionate about writing" and then immediately lead with a multiple choice question: "Are you passionate about writing?"

Absurd. And condescending. And I feel like you're about to sell me something.

How about you tell people what the group is for, and then you ask people to tell you about their actual works and process, instead of asking them metalanguage questions. How many self-respecting, experienced, sweat-on-the-brow fiction writers are going to put aside their intellectual wealth even momentarily to figure out how to answer "How would you describe your passion for writing?" in a way that conveys their love of the craft without triggering their gag reflex?

"What is writing to you?"

Another meta question having nothing to do with actual writing which instead requires the entrant to convey enthusiasm while suppressing the conflagration of cynicism and anti-authoritarianism.

If you can't properly vet passionate writers then there is no reason for anyone to join. But what is more vexing is that you think you need to vet writers at all. You don't. Let the writers show up and help them develop their passions through their interactions with other writers.