Idea to decentralize and improve democracy on blockchain basis to replace traditional goverments and more

The goal is to decentralize and improve democracy through dynamic delegation, transparency and digital spaces with full control in the hands of all people at any time. The frontend can be a forum like reddit where everything is in control of participants, like algorithms and layout, the backend could be build with help of ethereum contracts.

Proposals can be created by everyone but require a fee large enough to cover all possible costs but with the chance to make profit if the proposal is successful or loose the fees if the proposal is considered bad. The goal is to protect voters from useless polls as well as fraud and spamming thus there neeeds to be a high enough fee to enforce good quality. The proposal is distributed randomly to participants with the right to vote. The initial participants can decide to increase the number of participants if appropriate.

How is the power distributed?

Everyone has a value called "voting power" which represents the weight of someones vote. To prevent abuse someone needs to pay some amount of eth to gain an initial voting power. The eth will go into a vault and is managed by the community. The calculation of the voting power depends on votes other people do on your actions or on the results of your actions.

vote -> action -> consequences -> votes on consequences will affect the origin of the consequences

As you can earn money by creating good proposals there is an incentive for people to look out for bad poll results. If they found one they could create a new proposal with the goal to reverse the relevant actions and punish the responsible participants.

Participants can delegate their voting power to other people they trust and depending on their actions they might loose or gain voting power.

To limit risks from power accumulation there could be a veto which will be only relevant when there is >60% of voters inside a poll make use of it otherwise the veto will be completely ignored by the system and has not effect. If there is a successful veto case it should result in a reduction of voting power for people that voted against the will of the majority.

It’s likely that bad results will be contested because of the financial incentive there is for doing successful polls. It can end like with the stock exchange where there are a lot of people professionalizing in spotting good opportunities by predicting the market. If someone recognizes a supposedly bad result they can invest some fees to create a new poll to take action against the result. The system will choose a fixed amount of random voters, could include subgroups e.g education, a poll about the linux kernel is probably not for everyone so people can assign themselfes poll subjects which they are the most interested in. Above all to increase the chance to do good decisions. If the proposal was successful the initiator will get a reward. People can start to calculate the chances by doing a lot of research which will lead to a balanced result which is pretty close to the interests of the general public.

How to prevent abuse further?

• Increase the buy in for new participants according to the value of the initial voting power
• Participants should get paid regularly according to their voting power
• Regular voting is mandatory but vote spamming needs to be prevented
• In some cases participants can get a time ban
• Moderators, trustworthy people could get special privileg
• Cap for voting power