On the structure of the open party
Hello, habrasoobschestvo.
Continuing the theme of democratic changes , I will try to describe the possible structure of a new type of party.
So, what goals do we set for the new party? We have to:
')
It makes no sense even to make an absolutely protected system if it does not fulfill the main goal. Therefore, we first find a way to consider opinions.
What could be the wishes of the common man? How can he express his position and show political activity? Highlight the main points. Human can:
Provide all these features in the "electronic party" can be. To do this, you need to create a system of collective blogs and polls, similar to Habr - it is easy to see that this system justifies itself, on the main one we see only community approved and often useful content.
A simple person, having come to the site, should see a categorized system in which discussions of draft laws, discussions of moderators and discussions of problems of various subjects are clearly highlighted. Voting must be rendered separately and noticeably, but not available for anonymous and foreign users.
Each visitor can write about any problem that concerns him, or suggest a finished project. All these problems and projects should fall into a special section, “sandbox” without pre-moderation. After hitting the post there, it is viewed by the moderator and decides in which section it should be placed. The approved ones fall into the thematic sections, which are unacceptable (which may be meaningless, or violate the Constitution and other laws) are sent to a separate section, but still remain publicly available - this will avoid the hidden manipulation of the “party line” by the administration.
Anyone interested can comment on every problem, every bill. During the discussion, the draft can be adjusted, and the final version is put up for public vote.
Any participant can become a moderator by contacting the administration for the appointment “from above”, or by initiating a vote for himself for the appointment “from below”.
This is a concept in general terms. About the mechanisms of voting and elections will have to write more. In the meantime, let me turn to the description of the structure of the administration - as I understand it, many are worried about the problem of this concept rolling to something closed and similar to the CPSU.
So, what should be done so that the internal dictatorship cannot be established in the party? For this, it is necessary to make the actions of the administration transparent, powers limited, and the responsibility to the people must come quickly and without bureaucratic fuss.
Transparency of actions and the mechanism of responsibility is easy to arrange: each moderator or administrator should be assigned a history of his actions, a discussion page and an analogue of karma. Under certain conditions, for example, with negative karma, an open vote begins for removing a person from his post.
What can be said about powers? The “electronic party” can be built on the principles of self-organization, which means that the administration does not require titanic work on creating content, but only clearing the discussions from garbage and hiring additional “sweepers”. An attempt to seize power through the removal of “undesirable” posts and the appointment of “our own” will fail, because each moderator is personally liable to the community, and if they behave improperly, they will be quickly removed from the post by “bottom” efforts. And to prevent this, he will not have the opportunity, because both his karma and the voices in his election are determined by people.
Actually, what should the administration consist of? There should be people defining its appearance, there should be people creating its website, and of course there should be people working with its content.
This is how this structure looks like:
The organizational commission is the people who create the site and support its work, primarily managers, programmers and designers.
The financial commission is those who are engaged in both the search for funds directly for the party and advising on the budgets of the projects under discussion. I will not elaborate their work yet.
The role of the committees is reduced to the structuring of topics by topics (education, health care, general justice, etc.) and by levels (what is important in one city - remains at the level of local discussion; what matters for the country - rises to the federal ). The committees are equal and independent, but are obliged to exchange information and personnel with each other, if necessary.
The chairman of the committee appoints, removes and replaces moderators personally, or initiates voting on this issue.
The coordinator is a special figure, like the president in the country. He acts as a guarantor of freedom of speech within the party. He needs the authority to allow any personnel changes in the party, so that it works efficiently and transparently. He is responsible for the overall performance of the party, so in case sometime due to an oversight of the moderators, a vote begins for a project bordering on the violation of laws - the coordinator should be able to cancel or freeze this vote. It is still better to give the right of veto to the chairman than later to enjoy communication with the Federal Supervisory Service or the prosecutor's office.
But the coordinator will be forced to maintain free conditions - an attempt to seize power even from his side will lead to the discharge of karma and the loss of office.
In this post, many important details are not disclosed, since writing an infinitely long, albeit detailed, text does not make sense. If you like the concept - I will continue, until the preparation of the TZ :)
Continuing the theme of democratic changes , I will try to describe the possible structure of a new type of party.
So, what goals do we set for the new party? We have to:
- take into account the opinions and wishes of every interested citizen;
- protect the party from seizing domestic power.
')
It makes no sense even to make an absolutely protected system if it does not fulfill the main goal. Therefore, we first find a way to consider opinions.
What could be the wishes of the common man? How can he express his position and show political activity? Highlight the main points. Human can:
- trite vote
- propose a bill
- make an organizational note
- comment on something
- provide important information
- to participate in the internal party activities
- help financially
- report a problem for someone to solve.
Provide all these features in the "electronic party" can be. To do this, you need to create a system of collective blogs and polls, similar to Habr - it is easy to see that this system justifies itself, on the main one we see only community approved and often useful content.
A simple person, having come to the site, should see a categorized system in which discussions of draft laws, discussions of moderators and discussions of problems of various subjects are clearly highlighted. Voting must be rendered separately and noticeably, but not available for anonymous and foreign users.
Each visitor can write about any problem that concerns him, or suggest a finished project. All these problems and projects should fall into a special section, “sandbox” without pre-moderation. After hitting the post there, it is viewed by the moderator and decides in which section it should be placed. The approved ones fall into the thematic sections, which are unacceptable (which may be meaningless, or violate the Constitution and other laws) are sent to a separate section, but still remain publicly available - this will avoid the hidden manipulation of the “party line” by the administration.
Anyone interested can comment on every problem, every bill. During the discussion, the draft can be adjusted, and the final version is put up for public vote.
Any participant can become a moderator by contacting the administration for the appointment “from above”, or by initiating a vote for himself for the appointment “from below”.
This is a concept in general terms. About the mechanisms of voting and elections will have to write more. In the meantime, let me turn to the description of the structure of the administration - as I understand it, many are worried about the problem of this concept rolling to something closed and similar to the CPSU.
So, what should be done so that the internal dictatorship cannot be established in the party? For this, it is necessary to make the actions of the administration transparent, powers limited, and the responsibility to the people must come quickly and without bureaucratic fuss.
Transparency of actions and the mechanism of responsibility is easy to arrange: each moderator or administrator should be assigned a history of his actions, a discussion page and an analogue of karma. Under certain conditions, for example, with negative karma, an open vote begins for removing a person from his post.
What can be said about powers? The “electronic party” can be built on the principles of self-organization, which means that the administration does not require titanic work on creating content, but only clearing the discussions from garbage and hiring additional “sweepers”. An attempt to seize power through the removal of “undesirable” posts and the appointment of “our own” will fail, because each moderator is personally liable to the community, and if they behave improperly, they will be quickly removed from the post by “bottom” efforts. And to prevent this, he will not have the opportunity, because both his karma and the voices in his election are determined by people.
Actually, what should the administration consist of? There should be people defining its appearance, there should be people creating its website, and of course there should be people working with its content.
This is how this structure looks like:
The organizational commission is the people who create the site and support its work, primarily managers, programmers and designers.
The financial commission is those who are engaged in both the search for funds directly for the party and advising on the budgets of the projects under discussion. I will not elaborate their work yet.
The role of the committees is reduced to the structuring of topics by topics (education, health care, general justice, etc.) and by levels (what is important in one city - remains at the level of local discussion; what matters for the country - rises to the federal ). The committees are equal and independent, but are obliged to exchange information and personnel with each other, if necessary.
The chairman of the committee appoints, removes and replaces moderators personally, or initiates voting on this issue.
The coordinator is a special figure, like the president in the country. He acts as a guarantor of freedom of speech within the party. He needs the authority to allow any personnel changes in the party, so that it works efficiently and transparently. He is responsible for the overall performance of the party, so in case sometime due to an oversight of the moderators, a vote begins for a project bordering on the violation of laws - the coordinator should be able to cancel or freeze this vote. It is still better to give the right of veto to the chairman than later to enjoy communication with the Federal Supervisory Service or the prosecutor's office.
But the coordinator will be forced to maintain free conditions - an attempt to seize power even from his side will lead to the discharge of karma and the loss of office.
In this post, many important details are not disclosed, since writing an infinitely long, albeit detailed, text does not make sense. If you like the concept - I will continue, until the preparation of the TZ :)
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/98720/
All Articles