Voting rules explained

In various informative articles, we've explained some of the voting rules in the DirectDemocracyS system. This time, we'd like to provide some important explanations and rationales, and we'll do so through brief but comprehensive questions and answers.

Who can vote on DirectDemocracyS? Anyone who joins us by registering and creating a personal profile, after being activated, can vote in the groups and activities they're part of.

Can a free user, with no obligation to be present or perform any activity, vote? All our registered and activated users can vote, and their votes are counted if they follow all our rules, methods, and instructions.

So what's the difference between voting for lower-level and higher-level users? As we've said, anyone can vote, but their capabilities vary, as do the areas in which they can vote, in some cases the issues they can vote on, and whether the decisions they make are binding, where, and for whom. Free-level users can vote in limited groups and areas of our platforms, and while they can express their opinion, their votes are limited and binding, only and exclusively to the areas in which they participate in collective decisions. Lower-level users, despite having more groups and areas of activity, have similar "powers" to free-level users; therefore, their decisions are limited to a few areas and groups and are not binding on our entire system. The registered user types, with verified and guaranteed identities, who are the first-highest user type, and who have a blue check mark next to their name in our social area, on our websites, and on our platform, are an integral part of our truly and completely shared leadership. Therefore, their vote, combined with that of all other users of the same type, has enormous, concrete, and binding power over our entire system. Our official members, who are the second-highest user type, who have a blue check mark next to their name in our social area, on our websites, and on our platform, are an integral part of our collective ownership. Therefore, their vote, combined with that of all other users of the same type, has enormous, concrete, and binding power over our entire system. Between the first, the second, and all subsequent types of users, the value of their vote does not change, which remains one, binding, and decisive for our entire system. However, the areas in which they carry out their activities, the groups, and in many cases the issues on which they can decide, based on importance and the type of group in which they actually vote, change.

DirectDemocracyS guarantees anonymity and even invisibility for everyone, both inside and outside the system. However, only those with a verified and guaranteed identity and a blue check mark next to their name in the social area of our websites are eligible to vote. How is anonymity and invisibility guaranteed? First, to understand all these methods, you need to study our rules and instructions for identity verification. Let's simplify them briefly. Anyone who joins DirectDemocracyS and meets all the requirements can request identity verification. There are two options: the first is to have your identity verified by someone you know, who is at least a registered user with a verified and guaranteed identity (preferably an official member); the second is to have your identity verified by the identity verification team. In both cases, everything is done with the collaboration of our special security team. All identity verification procedures are encrypted and coded. Identity verification occurs primarily via video call, and only for official representatives, including political representatives (public figures and higher-level officials), who will remain anonymous, is there a subsequent in-person verification, with physical identification, by a group of official representatives from the Special Security Group. In all cases, identity verification generates a long, unique code, certifying that the verified person is the one on the photo ID (we only accept valid ID cards and passports in the same name). This code does not link the verified person to their username, which can remain permanently anonymous and even invisible. Our system automatically links the unique code generated by identity verification to another automatically generated unique code, and then, without any human intervention, links the username (which can be a nickname or a random code) to the second code. Simply put, no one knows the username or data of the owner of the personal profile, but only their identity is certified. Only in very rare, justified cases is it used to punish or reward the best users. This, too, is implemented with very detailed and secure rules that protect the identity, anonymity, and invisibility of the person, their personal data, and all their activities. When a person votes, they do so with their personal profile, which is and will forever remain anonymous (even if verified with identity verification, according to the previous methodologies), and even invisible to everyone else. However, when voting as an official representative or as a political representative (in their respective areas and specific groups), as public figures, they always vote according to the same rules, but obviously everyone knows the identities of these two types of users, who have profiles invisibly linked to their personal profile, via unique, encrypted, and untraceable codes. The visibility and identification of public figures in DirectDemocracyS increases gradually, based on the various stages, and the various activities, and the local, national, continental, and international groups to which one has access.

Is voting almost always open, with very few exceptions, and only to prevent problems? The DirectDemocracyS system offers authentic democracy and potentially infinite freedom, yet almost all of our votes are open. There's no need to be ashamed of your beliefs, and no one will ever be excluded for their beliefs, preferences, or even their choice. Open voting is mandatory because it allows everyone to verify for themselves whether their vote has actually been counted, exactly as it was cast. We did this because it's right to protect freedom of thought, expression, and voting, but it also helps prevent any possible doubts regarding the validity and regularity of each of our votes. It's very practical and secure, and it prevents disputes, suppositions, or nonsensical theories. Everyone actually sees the progress of the vote from start to finish.

your vote always be clearly and comprehensively motivated, explaining your reasoning? Your open vote should always be clearly and thoroughly motivated, explaining your reasons to everyone. This rule is very useful both for preventing hasty, superficial, or instinctive decisions, but with your motivation you can help others understand your reasoning, not to negatively influence them, but to offer a 360-degree view of the issue you're voting on, including everyone's motivations. In almost all cases, you can even change your mind, up until the final closing of the vote, but you must also justify the change in vote, leaving the previous reason intact.

Why should we assume full responsibility for all the potential consequences of our votes? DirectDemocracyS is different and better than all other systems precisely because we assume full responsibility—collectively, as a group, and even individually—for every decision we make. The cause-effect relationship of what we vote on is crucial for determining all accountability. Good intentions are helpful, but they are not enough to change and improve the world.

Where do votes take place in the DirectDemocracyS system? Literally everywhere, depending on the decisions to be made, so in all our activities, in every microgroup, and obviously in the specific groups reserved for voting.

In DirectDemocracyS, do we waste a lot of time voting? We've often said this: we don't spend our days voting, but we have very detailed implementing rules regarding what must be voted on together, and what must be decided in multiple groups, only with the approval of all five special groups. Each of our official members can propose practically anything, any change, and any vote, as long as it doesn't violate our fundamental rules or very important rules. Generally, we don't propose rules that overturn or radically modify previous rules, but rather we try to integrate and improve what has already been decided, with new ideas, projects, rules, and methodologies. There's a group that evaluates proposals and another that decides the importance of the vote. Each of our official members can participate in these two groups, as well as in the five special groups, and so there's true democracy, and infinite possibilities. There is also a group for establishing a quorum for a rule to be effective and approved, which varies based on the importance of the previous rule and the one to be voted on. To maintain our identity, fundamental rules can only be changed with a unanimous vote. Very important rules can only be approved with very high quorums, from 75% to 95% of those in favor. Important rules require a minimum quorum of 66% to 75%. Moderately important rules require a quorum of 50% + 1 vote to 66%, while normal rules and decisions are approved with a quorum of 50% + 1 vote. The first three votes must always be calculated based on the total number of eligible voters, while from the fourth vote onwards, the required quorum, based on actual voters, is sufficient. These are all very important security measures to ensure any necessary developments and improvements, without disrupting our previous work.

How do electors work? Electors are essential for preventing numerous problems, such as unlikely but possible attempts to create internal dictatorships, or attempts to boycott us (using front men and corrupt users, which we prevent with constant checks and integrity tests), or attempts to slow us down, or worse, stop us. By dividing our users by user type, numerical, geographic, and other subdivisions based on various, highly detailed implementation rules, we prevent all potential dangers and reprehensible activities. By voting in small groups, electors are still created, allowing anyone to verify the votes and their accuracy (in small groups, it's much easier), thus ensuring real and complete freedom of expression and authentic direct democracy.

We have written and will continue to write articles and informational materials explaining all our rules and the underlying rationale. We will also discuss how we vote, how we decide, and, most importantly, how anyone who is an official member can propose ideas, projects, rules, and improvements, first individually, then in a group, and subsequently with the involvement of countless groups and individuals. All this to ensure that decisions are shared by all, decided by all, the best possible, and binding on all.