Righ, but if organised well, the community as a whole can have control. No leaders, just delegates (spokespersons for the groups) who can be undelegated immediately if they speak with forked tongues
Thanks for your continuing responses @thehive. I appreciate you.
So, in the system i have in mind (Matrix-8) - at grass roots level, everyone joins an 8-PAC (8 People in Active Communication). The 8-PAC's are formed based in questionnaires the members complete, so grouped together based on similar interests. The members of the 8-PACS are anonymous. Each 8-PAC, meeting to discuss a particular subject, deliberting then arriving at an actionable consencus, elect a delegate to speak for them in an 8-PAC on the next level up, a group of 8 delegates speaking for 64 people from 8x ground level 8-PAC's. At any moment, if the delegate speaks wrongly (not as agreed), during a 2nd level meeting which the 1st level 8-PAC's can monitor live, he/she can be immmediately voted out (if he/she does not correct based on text message sent from his originating 8-PAC, and a new delegate voted in to replace him/her. That is just a beginning of an explanation.
There are four or 5 posts in the New Age DApps Community https://peakd.com/c/hive-153630/created which go into greater depth to get greater understanding. I in-courage you to investigate them deeply (including the links within them). Please come back with any questions.
Quite the opposite approach than stoicism, which is preparing for the worst as hope always lets you down. By planning for the worst, you won't be disappointed & instead can make more rational & logical decisions.
I probably have a better optimistic view than most about what can be achieved. Trust in those who have control is a different thing altogether.
Right. Yet organised well, the community as a whole will have control
That has yet to be seen.
Righ, but if organised well, the community as a whole can have control. No leaders, just delegates (spokespersons for the groups) who can be undelegated immediately if they speak with forked tongues
Okay. who has the amount to delegate, we are going in circles.
Let me rephrase that,
Who will vote the lower to speak for them above the top?
Thanks for your continuing responses @thehive. I appreciate you.
So, in the system i have in mind (Matrix-8) - at grass roots level, everyone joins an 8-PAC (8 People in Active Communication). The 8-PAC's are formed based in questionnaires the members complete, so grouped together based on similar interests. The members of the 8-PACS are anonymous. Each 8-PAC, meeting to discuss a particular subject, deliberting then arriving at an actionable consencus, elect a delegate to speak for them in an 8-PAC on the next level up, a group of 8 delegates speaking for 64 people from 8x ground level 8-PAC's. At any moment, if the delegate speaks wrongly (not as agreed), during a 2nd level meeting which the 1st level 8-PAC's can monitor live, he/she can be immmediately voted out (if he/she does not correct based on text message sent from his originating 8-PAC, and a new delegate voted in to replace him/her. That is just a beginning of an explanation.
There are four or 5 posts in the New Age DApps Community https://peakd.com/c/hive-153630/created which go into greater depth to get greater understanding. I in-courage you to investigate them deeply (including the links within them). Please come back with any questions.
Yup have looked , I do think it has great potential.
8-pac sounds almost as good as a 2-pac rap.
Quite the opposite approach than stoicism, which is preparing for the worst as hope always lets you down. By planning for the worst, you won't be disappointed & instead can make more rational & logical decisions.
Interesting difference in mindsets :^)
Yes, I think a combination of d the two works best, "trust in God, but also tie up the camel"
lol I can get behind that :^)