Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

I agree completely—but setting up a more democratic system would take a good amount of time, whereas a temporary solution (new host) would take almost no time at all. Tackle the immediate issues, then the long-standing ones.

3

ziq wrote (edited )

I'm fully in support of actually creating a functional deciding mechanism and applaud your efforts to attempt it. My only suggestion is that it's consensus-based instead of rule-of-the-majority. Raddle never had any policy deciding system to speak of because no one could code one. I never expected an anonymous voting system to be at all functional and was forever afraid it would be used by bad actors to destroy the site.

I made multiple proposals early on to create an actual policy-deciding system that wasn't open to abuse, but had no idea how to go about it myself.

Any system that uses rule-or-the-majority will exclude minority voices and turn the site into witchhunt central. Please take into account how much 'democracy' has fucked over the world.

3

dele_ted wrote

That's good to hear! Konsent is almost purely based on concensus, especially after we've added discussion during phase two, and are planning to implement stand-asides along with the veto system.

The two points where direct democracy is being used (phase 1, voting for the more urgent issues to go first, and phase 2, voting for the best solution), it is completely onymous. If a solution that doesn't take the minorities into serious consideration is voted for, it'll be vetoed instantly, and will have to be reformed.