Program decision activities

Our programs and activities must be carefully studied, and with the right mindset, to be understood and to evaluate their potential. First, we divide the activities of our system into various programs, even though, according to our rules, they all have different phases, which are based on their types, the times in which they are implemented, the ways in which they are implemented, and the places where they are implemented.

The typologies are numerous and well documented in our informational articles, while the timing varies based on the various priorities. The ways in which they are implemented are explained in our rules, while the locations have different importance. The exact order of locations is: international, continental, national, and local, from largest to smallest, and as we will see with our micro-groups, also vice versa, that is, from the smallest territory to the largest. The reason is very simple: while there are traditional, vertical hierarchies, even based on the larger size, there is a perfect balance, with bottom-up, horizontal hierarchies, which allows us to have shared rules that are enforced by everyone, at all times.

The above sentences will frighten those who don't know us, who won't understand their meaning, but we can assure you that everything has impeccable motivations.

Since mid-May 2026, we have started publishing some of our national programmes, based on the decisions of our organisations in the various countries.

We need to explain to you how these programs were created, so you can better understand our system and the enormous collective work we do.

Our international teams of human specialists, using the latest technology, have created a comprehensive international program, which is used at every international stage, and at every continental stage, adapting it to the specificities of each continent.

Ours is an authentic democracy: competence as a collective duty

It's important to clarify a common misunderstanding: at DirectDemocracyS, the "specialist filter" is not a separate or external entity, but rather all of our official members. Each of our members, based on their declared, documented, verified, and constantly tested and updated expertise, is an integral part of our specialist groups.

Our system isn't a political program written on paper and forgotten. It's living organizational software. Because our technologies, starting with allddsAI, constantly learn from new data and new challenges, our programs are also updated, adapted, and refined daily. What you read today is the result of this constant evolution: a system that, thanks to your participation, becomes more efficient, more equitable, and better able to respond to the world's real needs every day.

There is no distinction between "leaders" and "rank-and-file": a widespread network of knowledge is activated based on the sector of intervention. If one of our official members possesses expertise in a specific field, that knowledge is systematized and validated. This means that every choice, every program, and every activity of DirectDemocracyS is not the result of subjective opinion or political expediency, but is based exclusively on true, accurate, factual information documented by reliable sources, analyzed by those trained to understand and apply it.

Ours is, therefore, an authentic and comprehensive democracy of knowledge: because each member contributes their verified expertise, the decision-making process enjoys a technical depth inaccessible to traditional representative models. We do not rely on electoral promises, but on the power of verified data. In DirectDemocracyS, citizens are not simply passive voters called upon to choose from options predefined by others, but active participants who, with their professionalism, contribute to building, verifying, and validating the collective program. It is this combination of democratic participation and technical rigor that makes our system the only tool truly capable of governing the complexity of the contemporary world without errors, corruption, or propaganda.

In DirectDemocracyS, the filter of specialists isn't a limit to democracy, but rather its guarantee of authenticity. To understand this balance, we must stop seeing democracy as a mere numerical count (the "gut vote") and begin to see it as a system for managing reality.

This is how the filter of specialists enables, rather than hinders, democracy.

1. The Paradox of Competence and Authentic Democracy

"Traditional" democracy often fails because it confuses popular legitimacy with operational capacity. A people can vote for a direction (for example, "we want clean energy"), but if the technical choice to achieve it is flawed, the result will be economic or social disaster.

At DirectDemocracyS, we operate on a clear distinction:

Sovereignty belongs to the Community: Direction, ethics, desire for change, and final approval remain in the hands of the official members. Shared leadership decides where to go.

Technology is for the Specialists: Getting there efficiently, sustainably, and free of corruption is a task that requires professional analysis.

The filter of specialists doesn't "vote for the people," but selects viable options for the people to vote on. This transforms democracy from a blind choice between slogans to an informed choice between validated projects.

2. Why the expert vote is the heart of stability

The vote or approval of specialists is essential for three critical reasons:

Anti-Corruption Filter: Corruption in external systems often arises from the confusion between private interests and public management. DirectDemocracyS specialists operate in a system where their decisions are tracked, tested by our AI (ddsAI), and based on defined collective well-being parameters. They cannot "sell" a project because it must be vetted by other specialists, working groups, and algorithmic analyses.

Macroeconomic Parameter Protection: Many popular proposals, though well-intentioned, would be harmful if implemented incompetently (for example, printing money or creating unsustainable bonuses). Specialists ensure that each initiative is compatible with economic reality, protecting the most vulnerable groups who are often the first victims of incompetent policies.

Reducing Uncertainty: In a complex system, "truth" is not an opinion. If a water or urban planning project has structural flaws, it's not a matter of "democratic preference," but of physics and engineering. The expert doesn't have an opinion, but a technical responsibility to certify that the project works.

3. Balance: Experts are not a "Caste"

This is the crucial part for our authentic democracy: specialists are not an external elite, but members of the system.

They are not chosen by political appointment, but by demonstrated competence in the areas of work.

Their work is transparent and validated. If a group of specialists proposes something that doesn't meet the system's criteria or ignores the needs of the population, that work is corrected or rejected by other working groups and cross-checked by other organizations (national or continental).

Every official member, if he acquires the necessary skills, can become a specialist. The system is not closed: it is a social elevator based on preparation.

4. The Function of Technologies (ddsAI)

The filter isn't just human. When a specialist analyzes a program, it's immediately compared with allddsAI simulations. The human expert adds ethical sensitivity and understanding of the social context; technology provides risk calculations and projections.

The perfect balance is here: the human provides the intention, the technology provides the reality check.

In summary

The expert vote is important because, in DirectDemocracyS, the power to decide without expertise is the first step towards irresponsibility.

Ours is a "Democracy of Reality": we don't want to win elections with empty promises; we want to transform society by solving real problems. To do this, democracy must be equipped. The filter of specialists is our "equipment": it ensures that, when our community votes, the program it approves is solid, achievable, and beneficial to all, without discrimination.

In this way, democracy ceases to be a stage for propaganda and finally returns to being a tool for collective construction.

Based on the international program, our continental groups of human specialists, with the help of the best technologies, on each continent, have created a general continental program, which is used in each of our continental phases, and each national phase, adapting it to the specificities of each country, each continent.

Based on the international program, the continental program, our national groups of human specialists, with the help of the best technologies, in each country, on each continent, have created a general national program, which is used in each of our national phases, adapting it to the specificities of each country, on each continent.

Based on the international program, the continental program, and the various national programs, our local groups of human specialists, with the help of the best technologies, in every geographical, territorial, administrative, and electoral subdivision, from the largest to the smallest, of each country, on each continent, have created a general local program, which is used in each of our local phases, adapting it to the specificities of each urban or rural area.

In addition to the great work of our experts at a general level, for each specific topic and sector, our specialists have created, at every level, in every phase, many working groups, to propose, discuss, decide, choose, test, vote, and make available in the various groups, the various activities and programs.

You may have noticed that we talk about human and technological specialists, because our human work must always be analyzed and evaluated by all our technologies, which are primarily: ddsAI, our official Artificial Intelligence, collectively owned by our system and all our official members. Thanks to our democracy project, all existing Artificial Intelligences, integrated into allddsAI, both directly and through human bridges, also perform proactive activities to efficiently and intelligently solve any possible problem, professionally. Our groups of human specialists, in turn, analyze, evaluate, and APPROVE the work of our technologies.

But obviously, not only our human specialists and our technologies are involved in these important activities, but all our official members, based on their respective expertise, and based on their respective residences and citizenships, can propose activities, ideas, projects, and programs to integrate, and if possible improve, previous work.

We're often asked why we don't entrust everything to AI or limit ourselves to human management alone. Our answer lies in the method: humans bring the ethical vision, cultural context, and moral responsibility; our AIs (ddsAI and allddsAI) bring the data processing capabilities, macroeconomic model analysis, and long-term impact projections. Our system is not an alternative to human intelligence, but rather its enhancement. The final approval, which remains human, guarantees that no algorithm can ever replace the collective will of our official members.

But what happens if one of our official members isn't an expert on a topic, but has a brilliant idea, or presents a program in a professional manner? It would be wrong to ignore good ideas, so literally for every idea from every official member, we create a working group with other people who possibly have similar expertise or ideas, and we try to present the idea, project, or program in a detailed and professional manner. This work takes place in our free groups, in reserved areas of our websites, and on our platforms. Our specialists will then analyze, review, and possibly integrate and improve the proposals. Finally, if deemed useful, they will approve them and incorporate them into our programs.

But why is such a procedure necessary? Because every activity in DirectDemocracyS requires expertise, and while each of our official members can pursue ideas, projects, activities, and programs, bringing them to fruition requires the expertise and professionalism of our human and technological experts. Good ideas aren't enough if they don't benefit the public, whether internally or externally, without any form of discrimination. In all other systems, we see the damage, often very serious, caused by a lack of professionalism, or by programs that serve the interests of a few, or by corruption. DirectDemocracyS as a system must empower professionals to analyze, evaluate, and approve. This does not take away the voting power of our shared leadership, nor the power of choice of our collective ownership. Everything, based on its importance, with very detailed voting rules, must be approved by our users with verified and guaranteed identities, based on their residence and citizenship.

Let me explain. For international, and therefore global, decisions, based on the importance of the decision to be made binding on all, all those entitled to vote vote and decide together. Only those with a verified and guaranteed identity can vote, to prevent multiple votes, fake profiles, fronts, and other unfair methods. In all civilized countries, to cast your vote, the first thing you must do is be identified. In DirectDemocracyS, the right to vote is binding on our system and on those who participate in it. This decisive vote is obtained after identification through very detailed implementation rules, which still allow for virtually total anonymity, and even invisibility. To vote, always look for the blue check mark next to your username in our social media area on our websites. The vote of those with the blue check mark next to their username, in our social area, on our websites, on our platforms, is legal, valid, and therefore binding. However, in their respective groups and restricted areas, all our users, of all types, can vote and decide. Their vote, even if expressed in these "reserved areas, and therefore invisible to others," is not binding on our system, nor on those who are part of it. However, it is valid , advisory, and even useful for certain activities, even from a statistical point of view, in certain areas.

Every decision, every vote, and every technical validation step within our system is documented. This means that, at any time, it's possible to reconstruct the progress of a proposal: who submitted it, which specialists evaluated it, which tests it passed with ddsAI, and how our community voted. This radical transparency is our best defense against the opacity and manipulation typical of traditional systems.

For continental decisions, residents, or citizens, of one country on each continent vote. Obviously, if a person has two or more citizenships, from two or more countries, from two or more continents, they will be able to vote in two or more continents, based on their right to vote and run for office in two or more countries.

The same rules apply to national and local decisions, based on citizenship and habitual residence, where one lives at least six months of the year. Let's explain this important concept further. DirectDemocracyS is a unique system, united in diversity, with the right people in the right places, in which each of our official members is the true protagonist and collective owner of the entire system. However, fair and equitable local autonomy exists and is guaranteed, while respecting the rules, methodologies, and instructions of the larger phases. Simply put, every country, and every local area, has enormous potential, because it is right and fair that it should be so.

International programs are voted on by everyone; continental programs are voted on by those who live in or are citizens of a country or countries, or of a continent or continents. At the national level, citizens of each country, residents abroad, and even non-citizens vote according to national rules. In many countries and local subdivisions, there are reserved voting groups for all foreign citizens working legally, in each country and local subdivision, and in some countries, there are voting groups even for those without a residence permit or who are not working. But while we always recommend allowing anyone residing in a given area to participate in many activities and therefore to cast their vote, these are decisions that are made locally, chosen in collaboration with our national organizations.

Our national organizations communicate, coordinate, support, authorize, and monitor all the various local organizations, from the largest to the smallest, which are unique, united, and indivisible. The only ones that can have multiple groups in the same urban or rural area are micro-groups. However, they can then unite, if they wish, if requested by their respective local and national organizations, and if necessary, to create a single local organization within their respective local subdivisions, such as a street block or neighborhood.

Only in cases where a microgroup has neighbors who aren't on good terms, or if there are too many official members (to ensure everyone is involved), can you decide to create separate groups within the same geographic, territorial, administrative, and electoral area. The various microgroups or official organizations, even if separate, will still be united in the next larger local organization, up to national ones, and depending on the type of user, including continental and international.

Very important explanation.

The international, continental, national, and local phases, along with the various micro-groups, are ongoing and concurrent, but each is moving forward with various activities, based on identical rules, methodologies, instructions, and motivations, but with many fair and equitable local autonomies. For example, not all of our national organizations want to have a presence outside of our system; some prefer to conduct all their activities exclusively on our platforms. This is one of the reasons why we don't have presentation pages or groups on various social networks, apps, and external websites. While we could create an external information presence, no one is obligated to do so, and not everyone does so at the same time; others prefer to wait, and others have decided not to have external representation for now. We have made several hundred public pages available, including to our visitors, as well as some groups, even in various languages. We will soon be creating public pages in English for each country, and also for some local subdivisions, in addition to those in their respective languages. This will allow each country and territory to be visible to our visitors, offering them exclusive and exclusive previews of certain news, information, results, and announcements, and even discussions with our visitors, through various technological means.

We proceed similarly with our general, international, continental, national, and local programs. Each of our organizations has begun, at the right time, the creation of general and topic-specific programs, in a very detailed, competent, and professional manner. The publication of the various materials is carried out according to very detailed implementation rules, initially secretly, then confidentially within the various groups, then visible on pages for registered users. Subsequently, if and when each of our organizations wishes, they will make their content public to our visitors, in the manner and at the times agreed upon together.

Only then, if, when, and how they wish, can they, based on authorizations, make certain information public, even outside our platforms.

But how are these programs decided, and by whom? Each of our official members, based on their expertise, is part of specialist groups at various levels: international, continental, national, and local, from the largest to the smallest. Within their respective groups, they propose, discuss, select, test, and vote on various topics, programs, and activities. All this collective work is complemented by various ideas and decisions at various levels. Let's look at some examples. In national organizations, the work of continental and international organizations is taken into account. In local organizations, the activities and decisions of national, continental, and international organizations are taken into account. For example, if a country in DirectDemocracyS has a good idea, it can be integrated, adapted, and improved in its own country. So, in many cases, you will see programs with similar content, similar solutions, and similar rules. This methodology applies to our entire system. In practice, good ideas must be exploited by all those who join us. Some countries have specific rules, solutions suited to their own circumstances. However, there are certain imposed rules that apply to everyone. Everything must be based on truth, on reality, taking into account the interests of the entire global, continental, national, and local population. Situations must change and improve, basing everything on logic, common sense—we repeat, on truth, reality, on study, on expertise—without worsening macroeconomic parameters, without worsening citizens' living conditions, and possibly without increasing the tax burden for middle- and low-income groups. Our programs are not propaganda; they do not give away money, bonuses, and wealth to those unwilling to contribute to the collective well-being. And every idea, project, and new law must be a collective effort, proposed, chosen, tested, voted on, and implemented by everyone, or by as many people as possible, but always on the basis of expertise, with an informed, open, and motivated vote, and with full responsibility for any consequences.

At DirectDemocracyS, power is not an end in itself: it is inextricably linked to responsibility. Each of our official members, by casting their vote, declares that they understand the issue, have consulted the technical analyses, and are ready to assume responsibility for the consequences of their choice. We do not seek easy consensus; we seek informed consensus, based on the truth of the facts and the desire to actively contribute to the collective well-being.

It's crucial to understand that security in DirectDemocracyS isn't just protectionist, it's proactive. Our identity architecture, which guarantees external anonymity, simultaneously ensures the absolute integrity of internal data. Every decision-making transaction, from the proposal stage to the final vote, is protected by validation protocols that exclude any unauthorized external interference. We don't just count votes: we verify the validity of the right to express oneself in real time, making the manipulation that plagues electoral dynamics in the outside world technically impossible.

Finally, a crucial point: DirectDemocracyS doesn't depend on electoral cycles based on political expiration. Our system is permanent. We don't wait for elections to implement change; our activities, programs, and integrations run 365 days a year. Being an official member doesn't mean delegating power for years, but participating in a continuous process of improving the reality we live in. Those seeking a quick fix or an immediate bonus won't find a place here; those seeking the solid, methodical, and shared construction of a more equitable future will find in us the complete infrastructure to make it happen.

If you're curious to learn more about our programs, perhaps offering your own ideas, projects, and constructive suggestions, simply visit our websites and platforms, and use the contact form to let us know what you think. We look forward to hearing from you.