Preamble
Section 1: Summary & Introduction of Method
Section 2: Connect & Initiate
Section 3: Brainstorm
Section 4: Prioritize
Section 5: Proposal
Section 6: Decision Making & Agreement
Section 7: Broadcast
Section 8: Review and Revision
Section 9: Replicated Implementation
Section 10: Repeat
Section 11: Bottom Up Law of the Land
Section 12: Consent of Individual & Organizational Rights
Preamble
We THE PEOPLE declare our right to make decisions with and without representation.
Any and everyone who wants to be involved in decision making can do so at any time and any location of their choosing.
The foundation of decentralized democracy is documented transparent sessions between small groups of people building consensus together, and then propagating decisions and ideas to other groups for review, recognition and improvement.
Groups can be formed in unlimited and creative ways, only our imagination holds us back. It can be spontaneous, permeant bodies, random selection (sortition), bottom up, top down, or middle out. Any way of creating groups is supported.
For those not in a group, there can be unlimited digital online input and digital voting as well as asynchronous communication and collaboration with the public at large. Final decisions as well as accounting of digital votes are always certified during a recorded documented session of real people in real-time, for highest level accountability to THE PEOPLE.
The goal is always Supportive Consensus, but we require minimum majority rule. NO minority rule.
There can be no barrier to entry, no required label, no required ideology, or required condition of inclusion. All are welcome, and you are already empowered to start making decisions.
Section 1: Summary & Introduction of Method
This Declaration sets in motion unlimited power of the people to govern themselves though Decentralized Democracy, and oversee representation, using a simple method of problem solving and decision making.
Any existing or new group, permanent or temporary body, or any group of friends can implement this method simply by documenting their discussion and decisions, and publicly passing documentation on to the next group to continue solving the chosen problem.
To prepare simply make sure everyone attending knows in advance that everything will be documented, recorded and broadcast as part of Decentralized Democracy.
Section 2: Connect & Initiate
Agreement on the topic or problem to focus on, is the most important decision. There is nothing more powerful than control over the agenda and topic. If you control what people are allowed to talk about, and discuss, you control everything. That is why the goal is always consensus on the topic itself.
Any number of people can come together, 2, 3, 4, 5 although we encourage no more than about 10 in order to listen to each other and build consensus. If the group is too big, just split up into smaller groups to empower each individual.
If the group can’t agree on a topic then go through the entire method just on brainstorming and prioritizing the problem or topic to focus on first. If you still can’t agree then split up between the people who can agree on the topics that have the most support.
Section 3: Brainstorm
If there is only one single option and no one can think of a single other option then you can skip this step, but 99% of the time, someone can think of an potential issue and alternative option to whatever is being proposed.
Therefore after there is agreement on what to focus on, a brainstorm giving each person an opportunity to input their own perspective. Documenting all ideas within a brainstorm is esencial, since years from now a potential option that no one thought would be important actually turns out to be the solution to everything.
Section 4: Prioritize
For our prioritization we must use score voting to ensure that every individual option is considered equally and independently from every other option. This is the only way to scientifically know the option that has the most support.
For score voting we typically use 0-10 (actually 0-9.999999999), but any scoring will work fine. Including 1-5 stars etc…
If there are a lot of options, Scoring can be done on a spreadsheet, voting form, or other method.
If needed there can be multiple rounds of prioritization to reduce the total number from 100’s down to 10’s, and eventually less than 10.
Scientifically you can NOT prioritize less than 3-5 options, without risking eventual polarization.
Scientifically prioritization is never decision making. It is simply creating the highest level options, and there is no requirement for the level of support.
Section 5: Proposal
Which ever option has the most support is then turned into a proposal.
Writing a proposal is an art and a science. Different formatting will depend on preference, culture, group dynamics etc… We suggest having the proposal summarized in a single sentence, with additional details and links bellow. Just make sure the proposal is clear, and document all the details.
You can even start considering known pros and cons, or links to additional information needed for informed decision making.
This can also include expert information, expert knowledge, expert review, and expert decision making by people who claim to be experts. But the decision itself is always the accountability of THE PEOPLE. The PEOPLE also have THE POWER to empower experts, just like the passengers of a plane empower the pilot to fly the plane, but the passengers control the destination.
Section 6: Decision Making & Agreement
Once the proposal is drafted, the group can then review the proposal.
After reviewing the proposal everyone is given a chance to ask questions to make sure everyone understands everything presented in the proposal.
All questions are publicly documented within the proposal.
Then everyone has a chance to express concerns with the proposal. All concerns are also publicly documented with the proposal. If concerns turn into new options, then you go back to Section 4.
If there are no concerns it is possible to skip to objections and if there are no objections consensus can be verbally achived.
If there is even a single concern, including the option to strive for supportive consensus as opposed to willing consensus, then voting is required.
The group can use any voting method it wants to, but to meet the highest levels of Scientific Consensus Based Democracy, score voting is required.
Everyone gives their official score vote form 0-9.99999999 (10).
Score Table:
0 = Purposefully not voting
1-3 = NO
1 = Block
2 = Dissent
3 = Dislike
4-6 = Abstain
4 = Negative Abstention
5 = Neutral Abstention
6 = Positive Abstention
7-9 = YES
7 = Willing Consensus
8 = Supportive Consensus (highest level vote if there is a abstention)
9 = Congruency. (you believe everyone else will also vote YES, not a single abstention allowed)
Score voting is esencial for Consensus Based Scientific Democracy.
With the above model, a 6.51 vote is the minimum required to barely pass, but the goal is always to strive towards Supportive Consensus which is a score of 8+.
Section 7: Broadcast
A decentralized democracy is ONLY as good as its communications. Any documentation information, notes, links, discussion, communications, and anything related to the decision made must be documented and broadcast publicly and transparently to the public using the highest level scientifically recognized method of decentralized democratic communications available.
As we improve our models of decentralized communications for THE PEOPLE this step will get easier and easier. For now just make sure your session is recorded, live stream, and publish your decision on a website or social media platform (ideally decentralized social media).
You can use the hashtag #Decision #ConsensusDecision #THEPEOPLESDecision #DecentrilzedDemocracy #ThePeopleHaveSpoken etc… and we will be able to find and database all decentralized decisions and pass them on to the next group that will continue solving the problem and reaching scientifically recognized consensus.
Also just like with scientific research, it is just as important to broadcast proposals that do NOT pass. To review and understand why the proposal didn’t pass, what are alternatives and other options. What posible revisions could be made to the proposal to get it to pass in the future.
Our goal, just like scientific journals, is to document and have all proposals and decisions to be reviewed by the public and any other civic servants of THE PEOPLE who are willing to give an other go at solving a problem.
Anyone can help us start an Institutional scientific journal for decentralized democracy with all public proposals and decisions, please join us. This will be a digital journal, and can also even eventually become a verifiable immutable blockchain, and will probably start on the IPFS.
Section 8: Review and Revision
99.9999% of the time, the initial decision will be just the starting point. Through unlimited review, revision and updating back and forth between as many groups as needed, consensus can be reached
It is important to keep groups small, about 10 or less, so that consensus can be achieved over and over again. Review doesn’t happen in a vacuum, and a certain proposal or decision can be perfect for one community or location, but needs revision in an other. Other times a decision will work great for a certain time period, but then after 10 years something changes and review and revision is automatically initiated by any group of people and propagation continues.
There is no limit or barrier on who, when, why or any other context regarding review of any decision by anyone, at any time for any reason. Spam or fringe groups with obviously malicious decisions can simply be ignored, as long as official decisions made document any viable concerns or alternative options or perspectives along with the decision being made.
Section 9: Replicated Implementation
As a decision is replicated through many groups, the implementation from each group or connection between groups can begin. The more and more groups that sign on for implementation, the momentum will grow to support and make the decision be implemented quicker and quicker. The decisions will empower actions of individuals and working groups based on the momentum that is generated.
It is important to remember that a documented decision by itself is meaningless. What matters is the momentum and decentralized action that manifests from the decisions. The momentum supports the actions of individuals and work groups. Actions are power, decisions simply allow individuals and work groups to take action. Decentralized targeted action based on decentralized democratic decision making is the power of THE PEOPLE. We don’t have to wait or ask permission for this power, we already have it based on every democratic constitution and charter across the world.
Depending on the type of decision there will be thresholds and criteria for implementation and action. Certain types of decisions may require a million people before it can begin implementation. Other types of decisions like supporting this declaration can be implemented with as few as 2 people starting to do contagious publicly documented decision making of THE PEOPLE. Some decision may require $1 million held in escrow before implementation, and fundraising can start, or grant making can start immediately. Other decisions may not need monetary resources at all. Some decisions will require a certain % of the local population, some a % of the global population to meet scientific thresholds. It just depends on each individual decision, and the more groups that support a decision the more powerful it becomes.
Inter-Independent organizations of THE PEOPLE, can come together, including TONDOS, to oversee implementation of certain types of decision from the bottom up. Overtime these types of OPEN Public transparent collaborative institutions can become Decentralized Agencies and be protected directly by THE PEOPLE without top down government oversight being necessary.
Section 10: Repeat
The Consensus Based Democratic Method never stops. You just endlessly repeat over and over again with anyone interested and wiling to participate.
Many decisions will not make it all the way through the process, and then you just start over, and addressing concerns, prioritize, and listening or forming new groups until consensus can be reached. But even if a decision is made, certain issues could take months even years to find solutions that build consensus, even then, that is still just the beginning, as the goal is always to repeat and improve to ensure every voice and perspective is heard and strive towards consensus.
Just like the scientific method, the functionality, foundation, power, and ability to implement any decision is based on repetition and replication over and over again between every individual and small group considering the problem. THE PEOPLE deserve continuity, stability, and a strong foundation, and that comes form decisions that can meet the test of repetition over time between vast diversity of different groups, perspectives and group cultures.
Section 11: Bottom Up Law of the Land
The most important type of proposal in a Decentralized Democracy is the consensus agreement that a decision has been made to such a large scientific level, that it has met the level of becoming bottom up law of the land.
For a decision to reach the level of bottom up law, it must be indefinitely propagated, reaching a threshold and criteria of super majority agreement to be turned into law. It will have many decentralized agencies and organizations working to support it. Even then it can be questioned and reconsidered by anyone in the minority.
The scientific verification required starts with a decision needing to meet the threshold of the Multocracy standard, which is to have all view points striving towards Consensus. The Multocracy means that we have conducted a scientifically verifiable application of every decision making model and group that is Striving to Consensus, to ensure every point of view agrees and or has documented its dissent within the decision. By definition Decentralized Democracy has no single decision making model, therefore to scientifically verify a decision, it is all about proving that all or as many different decision making methods are all in consensus with the proposal. This includes but not limited to overall population, micro-locations, macro-locations, representatives, random considerations (sortition), direct digital vote, organizational, community, sector, in-person, and most importantly demographic representation, which must include any identity, cultural, worldview, strategic and language representation of THE PEOPLE.
This starts with pure population proven to have super majority, anything that is barely majority is simply postponed until we address every single other decision that has a higher level of support, and only when we get to the very lowest level support decisions do we start looking at scientifically how to prove the difference between 51.5% and 49.7%. We want to avoid that at all costs as much as possible and find better alternatives. We always focus first on the decisions that have the most scientifically verifiable level of support, like 90%, 80%, 70% etc… then work down toward the 50%+1 minimum requirement for majority rule.
A decision is not about just documenting the majority, but also the viewpoint of the opposition and the problems that still need to be addressed. If every view point of dissent and concern is not properly documented with the decision, then it doesn’t meet basic criteria for the level of THE PEOPLES bottom up law, and is NOT considered striving for Consensus, decentralized, nor democratic.
Decentralized consensus based decision making is not for the fait of heart. It is for those who believe that a world is possible where THE PEOPLE are THE POWER and all decisions stem from bottom up collaborative and open consensus.
Just like any other decision, finalizing bottom up law requires statistically and scientifically verifiable information to document the state and ever evolving future of the decisions being made. By definition Decentralized Democracy and decentralized Decisions are always alive and can evolve in an instant from a single individual expressing an unconsidered concern that could ripple and propagate and eventually change how 8 billion people continue to live there lives.
Typically the most important decisions that evolve into bottom up decentralized laws of THE PEOPLE also are paired with bottom up decentralized institutions and implementation. Therefore you usually can tell when a bottom up decision has reached the level of a fully functional inter-dependent institution to meet the threshold of a bottom up law of THE PEOPLE. That decentralized institution overseeing the implantation of THE PEOPLES bottom up law would be founded on the principle of recognition law. And the PEOPLE always have THE POWER to remove that recognition at anytime, whenever they want to.
Section 12: Consent of Individual & Organizational Rights
With decentralized democracy, the individual is the foundation of all rights and permissions unto each there own. This is both an individual being, as well as a permanent individual organization or individual decision making body within an organization. Anytime an individual is listed in this section it means either a individual being or individual permeant group mind.
Individuals can make decisions at anytime, for any reason, and those decisions are based on their own rights and responsibilities as a citizen to whatever they as an individual choose to pledge allegiance to.
With decentralized decision making, a individual doesn’t have to come to consensus with anyone except themselves, therefore all the individual does to engage in the mass decision making process is to publicly or privately publish their chosen rights for their own person on their own profile or through metadata.
Any right or decision that individual chooses to adhere to is simply documented in their own bill for the rights and values and world view that individual wants to live in. They document all the links, decisions, rights, values, and principles they live and want to be governed by, and keep those in their own private or public profile metadata.
The individual can then choose who has access to this data, and therefore who is able to scan and verify it when their rights are at risk. As a decentralized declaration it also serves as that individuals decentralized decision. The individual declaration is pinged monthly, or at least yearly per citizen to keep active with their decisions, then it is all available online or in person if printed or gaped, and can be verified using simple data programs, platforms, or AI.
Then either a accessible private automated protocol or public automated protocol scans all individual metadata for all decisions and all rights for each individual, and can compile a composite super majority and majority to ensure that all individual rights are always bottom up empowered from each individual. This process can then be verified through group decision making like the rest of the decentralized democracy.
Individual rights can not be changed on a daily basis, if an individual chooses to give up their rights, since that effects all other people it is permanent, or if they choose to change it, they need to go through a process that could take a year or more to get their rights back. Therefore if an individual chooses to take away a right because they don’t want others to have that right, it effects themselves indefinitely. Choose wisely for what rights you want to protect for yourself and your family when considering what rights you want to take away from others.
Rights can also be established in micro locations and online communities, and within organizations and individuals within an organization. Therefore there is no limit to the applicability of decentralized individual rights declared by individuals on their person or with their own identity.
This can be bottom up scientifically verified and see exactly which types of rights a consented upon by all people, and super majorities, all the way down to rights protected just for certain minorities, as each individual has their own direct empowerment of consent. If the individual doesn’t consent to loosing their right, they have the power to question the governance of the majority against their own individual right.
If a majority chooses to have and protect the rights of the majority, and an individual choose to not have that right, the majority does not require protections of that individual to have that right, as their rights are governed individually. If the majority does not protect a right, then it is much more important for the individual to declare their right, as their declaration is the primary protection that the majority would support. If you do not declare your individual rights, either privatly or publicly, you risk loosing them.
Many links and examples are coming. If you need help we are here to help your group be successful and if you want to help start a institutional scientific journal for decentralized democracy with all public proposals and decisions, please join us. This will be a digital journal, and can also even eventually become a verifiable immutable blockchain, and will probably start on the IPFS.
Leave a Reply