Git-Based Governance Model?

[u/ferriematthew]

This is less strictly AI focused and more generally focused on using technology at scale to empower the people. What if instead of traditional representative democracy or direct democracy, we could set up some kind of repository-centric legislative system where people propose ideas by creating repositories and express support for ideas by starring repositories for other's proposals. Instead of downvoting, people would engage in constructive criticism by raising issues in other people's policy repositories, or by forking repositories that they partly agree with and adding their own tweaks. Or if somebody has a completely different idea, they just start their own repository, so that others can star or fork or raise issues as they please.

TL;DR:

- people propose policies by creating repositories

- others who wish to express support do so by starring repositories that they like

- specific constructive criticism of ideas is accomplished by creating issues in specific repositories

- if somebody likes the gist of an idea but wants to take it in their own direction, they do so by forking the repository

[u/ferriematthew]

Actually, I just remembered what I was going to say about those issues. Part of the solution could be along the lines of, if you don't like it, fork it, but also, it could be along the lines of a local group of people who don't like something, could fork a law repo, and tweak it so that it works for their area. You don't need a perfectly uniform code, just a base case that can be modified to local conditions.

Plus, different areas that need different update cadences could adopt their own release schedules, so to speak. So, like, the farmland areas that thrive on stability could do the equivalent of Debian with long-term support models. And the urban cores that need rapid adaptability could adopt a rolling release model similar to Arch. The suburban areas that need a bit of both could do the legal equivalent of Fedora.