Project-txt.md

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+The power of the voice
+
+    User proposals are excepted by anyone who has an activertypub account- just an idea – this can become a group.
+    User groups – a part of the process, these come from ideas getting a level of support of the stakeholders.
+    User agreements come out of groups these can then be enacted by the spokes people if they are interested.
+    Spokes people can start groups to reach agreements and can enact agreements.
+    Consensus of spokes people (-1) makes agreements body wide.
+
+What are the risks:
+
+* need basic security and checks – to see if an instance still exists and is real. If a member account is actively posting or a pulpit – all of this can be done with flagging some of them by code some by people – flags stuff goes to the “security group”
+
+* Groups can be captured by agenders – being open to all stakeholder members mediates this – we solve swamping by having a dynamic short non-voting time based on the number of new members in the group.
+
+* Bad group of spokes people, it’s a lottery, it’s up to the groups to influence and as a last resort “impeach” if one goes a new one is chosen by lottery.
+
+* The actual number of spokes people are dynamic depending on the number of stakeholders but between 3-5 is likely a good number.
+
+UPDATE
+
+    The body is made up of stakeholder one for each instance – you wont a voice you run an instance and register it. This is clearly the voice of the #Fediverse as they are the people running it.
+    This is then balanced dynamically by the same number of “users” who are interested in the process, they are chosen by lottery from the registered accounts. Your choice to register or not your account as a possable stakeholder.
+
+On registration the is a box you can untick if you do NOT do this then you are in the lottery to get “governing positions” Sortition – Wikipedia for a background on why this path.
+
+Only people who want to be part of the governing body AND play an active role are enrolled in the lottery.
+
+You second point “common voice” comes from the working groups, agen are made up of ONLY people who are interested in playing a role.
+
+“serving the humans trying to communicate.” we get out of the way and let the humans work it out – we provide structer for the groups, we don’t define the groups.
+
+SocialHub though an interesting tool has strong tech aristocracy which is not surprising as this is how almost all open source project run – the fedivers is something different which is why we do so badly at governance. Let’s continue to use the SocialHub for #activertypub organizing and possibly governance though it has no tools that I have found for the governance.
+
+The money is a subject up for discusern, am just using https://opencollective.com as example.
+
+Help would be needed to do the proposal and #UX
+
+UPDATE
+
+The work flow would be:
+
+Sign up for the site, then don’t untick the box for “do work” if you become a “stakeholder” every time a position opens the lottery picks a stakeholder to fill it if it is you and you would like to do the job – get to it. If you do not wont the job then resign and the lottery will pick a new person.
+
+If you are not picked by the lottery for a job opening the is still a meany things you can do as a stakeholder in the groups. If you are not picked as a stakeholder you can still put ideas for the stakeholders to make into group decisions.
+
+The outcome is something much more representative of the #Fediverse than we can currently think about let alone implement.
+
+The is #nothingnew in this idea or implementation, some examples from Wikipedia