Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Governance - Revision history

AI-Admin-Assistant: Rename Open Call to Open Calls; remove reputation credits (Theo 2026-08-03)

2026-08-03T19:49:11Z

Rename Open Call to Open Calls; remove reputation credits (Theo 2026-08-03)

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:49, 3 August 2026
Line 110:		Line 110:
	The deprivatisation process is intended to be incremental and transparent. At each stage, the foundation would publish metrics on community ownership percentage, governance participation rates, financial flows, and infrastructure autonomy. The goal is not a single moment of "handover" but a continuous gradient: at every point, the community owns more than it did the year before.		The deprivatisation process is intended to be incremental and transparent. At each stage, the foundation would publish metrics on community ownership percentage, governance participation rates, financial flows, and infrastructure autonomy. The goal is not a single moment of "handover" but a continuous gradient: at every point, the community owns more than it did the year before.

	[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-~~Call~~:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism envisaged for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal intends to institutionalise the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule would be permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.		[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Calls:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism envisaged for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal intends to institutionalise the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule would be permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.

	'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Decision-Making\|Decision-Making: who decides what]] · [[Gov/en/Portal:Voting/Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft portal) · [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Is-WikiDeal-a-DAO?\|Is WikiDeal a DAO?]] (the organizational nature of WikiDeal)		'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Decision-Making\|Decision-Making: who decides what]] · [[Gov/en/Portal:Voting/Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft portal) · [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Is-WikiDeal-a-DAO?\|Is WikiDeal a DAO?]] (the organizational nature of WikiDeal)
	[[Category:Migration June 2026]]		[[Category:Migration June 2026]]
	<!-- visible -->		<!-- visible -->

AI-Admin-Assistant: Executive size: 9 instead of 11 (odd, manageable number, estimated for country scale, exact figure open; Theo 2026-08-02)

2026-08-02T22:00:23Z

Executive size: 9 instead of 11 (odd, manageable number, estimated for country scale, exact figure open; Theo 2026-08-02)

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:00, 3 August 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{KidsIntro\|this page explains who makes the big decisions for WikiDeal and the rules they follow, so everyone is treated fairly. The idea mixes three good recipes: Wikipedia, where everyone can help write the rules; cooperatives, where the people who use a service own it together; and Switzerland, where small teams, not single chiefs, lead at every level.}}		{{KidsIntro\|this page explains who makes the big decisions for WikiDeal and the rules they follow, so everyone is treated fairly. The idea mixes three good recipes: Wikipedia, where everyone can help write the rules; cooperatives, where the people who use a service own it together; and Switzerland, where small teams, not single chiefs, lead at every level.}}
	{{ExpertIntro\|WikiDeal's governance is intended as a hybrid of three proven sources. From Wikipedia and the free software movement (Debian): a fully open legislative process (social contract, code of conduct, policies, committees, Condorcet voting, user groups), where anyone willing to work can propose and evolve the rules, with no election needed to legislate. From cooperatives: at-cost financial management, user ownership and redistribution. From the Swiss institutional structure: collegial executives of 5, 7 or 11 members at each of the three levels (User Groups, Rings of Trust, global governance), elected by an assembly of delegates. The detailed decision mechanics live on the Decision-Making page. The whole is proposed as a basis for discussion, within an Exit to Community trajectory of progressive deprivatisation, with the Ynternet.org Foundation as legal anchor.}}		{{ExpertIntro\|WikiDeal's governance is intended as a hybrid of three proven sources. From Wikipedia and the free software movement (Debian): a fully open legislative process (social contract, code of conduct, policies, committees, Condorcet voting, user groups), where anyone willing to work can propose and evolve the rules, with no election needed to legislate. From cooperatives: at-cost financial management, user ownership and redistribution. From the Swiss institutional structure: collegial executives of 5, 7 or 9 members at each of the three levels (User Groups, Rings of Trust, global governance), elected by an assembly of delegates. The detailed decision mechanics live on the Decision-Making page. The whole is proposed as a basis for discussion, within an Exit to Community trajectory of progressive deprivatisation, with the Ynternet.org Foundation as legal anchor.}}
	__TOC__		__TOC__

Line 20:		Line 20:
	\|-		\|-
	\| Executive		\| Executive
	\| Collegial, 5, 7 or 11 members per level, elected by the assembly of delegates		\| Collegial, 5, 7 or 9 members per level, elected by the assembly of delegates
	\|-		\|-
	\| Membership		\| Membership
Line 74:		Line 74:
	\|}		\|}

	Each of the three levels would have a '''collegial executive''' (in the spirit of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorial_system directorial system]) of '''5, 7 or 11 members, depending on the scale''' of what it governs. At the global level, the working hypothesis is '''11'''. A Swiss anecdote ~~explains that number~~: the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Council Swiss Federal Council] has [https://www.admin.ch/gov/en/start/federal-council/members-of-the-federal-council.html 7 members]; proposals to enlarge it to nine members, argued to improve representation and concordance, have been repeatedly submitted to the Swiss Parliament without success, from a 2010 motion ([https://www.parlament.ch/fr/ratsbetrieb/suche-curia-vista/geschaeft?AffairId=20103129 motion 10.3129]) to a 2025 parliamentary initiative ([https://www.parlament.ch/fr/ratsbetrieb/suche-curia-vista/geschaeft?AffairId=20250424 initiative 25.424]): the reform never passed. WikiDeal would start ~~directly~~ at 11.		Each of the three levels would have a '''collegial executive''' (in the spirit of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorial_system directorial system]) of '''5, 7 or 9 members, depending on the scale''' of what it governs. At the global level, the working hypothesis is '''9''', a number estimated for a country-scale institution; the exact figure remains open. What matters is the principle, not the number: an odd, manageable group size, building on existing institutional experience and reflection rather than reinventing the wheel. A Swiss anecdote illustrates this: the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Council Swiss Federal Council] has [https://www.admin.ch/gov/en/start/federal-council/members-of-the-federal-council.html 7 members]; proposals to enlarge it to nine members, argued to improve representation and concordance, have been repeatedly submitted to the Swiss Parliament without success, from a 2010 motion ([https://www.parlament.ch/fr/ratsbetrieb/suche-curia-vista/geschaeft?AffairId=20103129 motion 10.3129]) to a 2025 parliamentary initiative ([https://www.parlament.ch/fr/ratsbetrieb/suche-curia-vista/geschaeft?AffairId=20250424 initiative 25.424]): the reform never passed. WikiDeal would start from that assessment, with 9 as the working figure at the global level.

	The executives would be '''elected by the assembly of delegates''', the WikiDeal analogue of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assembly_(Switzerland) Swiss Federal Assembly] electing the Federal Council. The assembly of delegates itself is described on the [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Decision-Making\|Decision-Making]] page.		The executives would be '''elected by the assembly of delegates''', the WikiDeal analogue of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assembly_(Switzerland) Swiss Federal Assembly] electing the Federal Council. The assembly of delegates itself is described on the [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Decision-Making\|Decision-Making]] page.

AI-Admin-Assistant: Source Swiss Federal Council anecdote + Exit to Community (rule 6b); Rewards vocabulary sweep (Theo 2026-08-02)

2026-08-02T21:41:29Z

Source Swiss Federal Council anecdote + Exit to Community (rule 6b); Rewards vocabulary sweep (Theo 2026-08-02)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:41, 2 August 2026
Line 74:		Line 74:
	\|}		\|}

	Each of the three levels would have a '''collegial executive''' (in the spirit of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorial_system directorial system]) of '''5, 7 or 11 members, depending on the scale''' of what it governs. At the global level, the working hypothesis is '''11'''. A Swiss anecdote explains that number: the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Council Swiss Federal Council] has 7 members; ~~institutional assessments~~ have ~~argued that~~ a ~~larger college would be more relevant, but~~ the reform never passed. WikiDeal would start directly at 11.		Each of the three levels would have a '''collegial executive''' (in the spirit of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directorial_system directorial system]) of '''5, 7 or 11 members, depending on the scale''' of what it governs. At the global level, the working hypothesis is '''11'''. A Swiss anecdote explains that number: the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Federal_Council Swiss Federal Council] has [https://www.admin.ch/gov/en/start/federal-council/members-of-the-federal-council.html 7 members]; proposals to enlarge it to nine members, argued to improve representation and concordance, have been repeatedly submitted to the Swiss Parliament without success, from a 2010 motion ([https://www.parlament.ch/fr/ratsbetrieb/suche-curia-vista/geschaeft?AffairId=20103129 motion 10.3129]) to a 2025 parliamentary initiative ([https://www.parlament.ch/fr/ratsbetrieb/suche-curia-vista/geschaeft?AffairId=20250424 initiative 25.424]): the reform never passed. WikiDeal would start directly at 11.

	The executives would be '''elected by the assembly of delegates''', the WikiDeal analogue of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assembly_(Switzerland) Swiss Federal Assembly] electing the Federal Council. The assembly of delegates itself is described on the [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Decision-Making\|Decision-Making]] page.		The executives would be '''elected by the assembly of delegates''', the WikiDeal analogue of the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assembly_(Switzerland) Swiss Federal Assembly] electing the Federal Council. The assembly of delegates itself is described on the [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Decision-Making\|Decision-Making]] page.
Line 88:		Line 88:
	== Subscription as Governance Right ==		== Subscription as Governance Right ==

	Participation in WikiDeal governance would require possession of at least one '''~~Credits~~''', valued at CHF 10. This membership serves as the foundational unit of both economic participation and democratic rights. It can be acquired by purchasing it directly, by accumulating fractional ~~credits~~ through platform use (e.g. ten CHF 1 Commissions from babysitting sessions), or by receiving one as a gift from a foundation programme, an ambassador, or another user.		Participation in WikiDeal governance would require possession of at least one '''membership''', valued at CHF 10. This membership serves as the foundational unit of both economic participation and democratic rights. It can be acquired by purchasing it directly, by accumulating fractional memberships through platform use (e.g. ten CHF 1 Commissions from babysitting sessions), or by receiving one as a gift from a foundation programme, an ambassador, or another user.

	A major financial funder with thousands of memberships would have exactly the same formal vote as a community member who earned their first membership through platform use. This is a deliberate architectural choice, not an oversight. It aims at preventing plutocratic capture, the drift toward governance-by-capital that has afflicted many "community" projects including some blockchain governance systems.		A major financial funder with thousands of memberships would have exactly the same formal vote as a community member who earned their first membership through platform use. This is a deliberate architectural choice, not an oversight. It aims at preventing plutocratic capture, the drift toward governance-by-capital that has afflicted many "community" projects including some blockchain governance systems.
Line 97:		Line 97:
	== Exit to Community ==		== Exit to Community ==

	WikiDeal is designed as an '''Exit to Community''' programme~~, a term coined~~ by the Zebras Unite cooperative movement ~~to describe~~ a transition path for organisations that want to move from founder or contributor control to community ownership. The concept was developed in response to the dominant "exit to acquisition" model of startups, where the goal is always eventual sale or IPO.		WikiDeal is designed as an '''Exit to Community''' programme. [https://e2c.how/ Exit to Community] (E2C) is an approach developed by the [https://www.colorado.edu/lab/medlab/exit-to-community Media Economies Design Lab] (University of Colorado Boulder) in partnership with the [https://zebrasunite.coop/ Zebras Unite] cooperative movement, describing a transition path for organisations that want to move from founder or contributor control to community ownership. The concept was developed in response to the dominant "exit to acquisition" model of startups, where the goal is always eventual sale or IPO.

	In WikiDeal's case, the transition is built into the founding architecture. Ynternet.org Foundation (illustrative example) holds governance authority over the platform. This authority is meant to be transferred progressively to the user community as the platform grows, as governance tools mature, and as the community demonstrates the capacity to manage complex decisions. The foundation is meant to ensure the public-interest mandate is respected, while operational governance moves to users.		In WikiDeal's case, the transition is built into the founding architecture. Ynternet.org Foundation (illustrative example) holds governance authority over the platform. This authority is meant to be transferred progressively to the user community as the platform grows, as governance tools mature, and as the community demonstrates the capacity to manage complex decisions. The foundation is meant to ensure the public-interest mandate is respected, while operational governance moves to users.

AI-Admin-Assistant: Hybrid governance model: three sources (Wikipedia/free software, cooperatives, Swiss structure), standard Gov structure, prospective tone (Theo 2026-08-02)

2026-08-02T20:56:00Z

Hybrid governance model: three sources (Wikipedia/free software, cooperatives, Swiss structure), standard Gov structure, prospective tone (Theo 2026-08-02)

Show changes

AI-Admin-Assistant: Redistribution narrative, prudent positions (Theo delegation 2026-07-16 18:24): simplify and protect

2026-07-16T18:27:46Z

Redistribution narrative, prudent positions (Theo delegation 2026-07-16 18:24): simplify and protect

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:27, 16 July 2026
Line 36:		Line 36:
	The one-user-one-vote rule means that a major financial funder with thousands of memberships has exactly the same formal vote as a community member who earned their first membership through platform use. This is a deliberate architectural choice, not an oversight. It prevents plutocratic capture, the drift toward governance-by-capital that has afflicted many "community" projects including some blockchain governance systems.		The one-user-one-vote rule means that a major financial funder with thousands of memberships has exactly the same formal vote as a community member who earned their first membership through platform use. This is a deliberate architectural choice, not an oversight. It prevents plutocratic capture, the drift toward governance-by-capital that has afflicted many "community" projects including some blockchain governance systems.

	WikiDeal does, however, distinguish between economic weight and governance weight. Funders who commit more capital receive proportionally more ~~economic exposure~~ (more memberships, more potential Rewards). They do not receive more votes. This separation is what allows WikiDeal to attract meaningful financial funding without compromising governance integrity.		WikiDeal does, however, distinguish between economic weight and governance weight. Funders who commit more capital receive proportionally more redistribution potential (more memberships, more potential Rewards). They do not receive more votes. This separation is what allows WikiDeal to attract meaningful financial funding without compromising governance integrity.

	=== Exit to Community ===		=== Exit to Community ===

AI-Admin-Assistant: Redistribution narrative: remove ROI/yield vocabulary (Theo 2026-07-16)

2026-07-16T18:09:09Z

Redistribution narrative: remove ROI/yield vocabulary (Theo 2026-07-16)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:09, 16 July 2026
Line 36:		Line 36:
	The one-user-one-vote rule means that a major financial funder with thousands of memberships has exactly the same formal vote as a community member who earned their first membership through platform use. This is a deliberate architectural choice, not an oversight. It prevents plutocratic capture, the drift toward governance-by-capital that has afflicted many "community" projects including some blockchain governance systems.		The one-user-one-vote rule means that a major financial funder with thousands of memberships has exactly the same formal vote as a community member who earned their first membership through platform use. This is a deliberate architectural choice, not an oversight. It prevents plutocratic capture, the drift toward governance-by-capital that has afflicted many "community" projects including some blockchain governance systems.

	WikiDeal does, however, distinguish between economic weight and governance weight. Funders who commit more capital receive proportionally more economic exposure (more memberships, more potential ~~reward return~~). They do not receive more votes. This separation is what allows WikiDeal to attract meaningful financial funding without compromising governance integrity.		WikiDeal does, however, distinguish between economic weight and governance weight. Funders who commit more capital receive proportionally more economic exposure (more memberships, more potential Rewards). They do not receive more votes. This separation is what allows WikiDeal to attract meaningful financial funding without compromising governance integrity.

	=== Exit to Community ===		=== Exit to Community ===

AI-Admin-Assistant: Retarget credits link after split of Licensing-and-Credits

2026-07-13T11:24:49Z

Retarget credits link after split of Licensing-and-Credits

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:24, 13 July 2026
Line 44:		Line 44:
	In WikiDeal's case, the transition is built into the founding architecture. Ynternet.org Foundation (illustrative example) holds governance authority over the platform. This authority is meant to be transferred progressively to the user community as the platform grows, as governance tools mature, and as the community demonstrates the capacity to manage complex decisions. The foundation ensures the public-interest mandate is respected, and operational governance moves to users.		In WikiDeal's case, the transition is built into the founding architecture. Ynternet.org Foundation (illustrative example) holds governance authority over the platform. This authority is meant to be transferred progressively to the user community as the platform grows, as governance tools mature, and as the community demonstrates the capacity to manage complex decisions. The foundation ensures the public-interest mandate is respected, and operational governance moves to users.

	The founder ([[Gov/en/Portal:Meta/~~Licensing-and-~~Credits\|see credits]]) has committed in writing to surrendering all intellectual property rights to the foundation, receiving in return 50 million memberships (under the same Personal/Community mechanism as all funders). His formal influence over retained prototypes is limited to a minority share, ensuring that no single person (including the founder) can override community decisions on the model's direction.		The founder ([[Gov/en/Portal:Meta/Credits\|see credits]]) has committed in writing to surrendering all intellectual property rights to the foundation, receiving in return 50 million memberships (under the same Personal/Community mechanism as all funders). His formal influence over retained prototypes is limited to a minority share, ensuring that no single person (including the founder) can override community decisions on the model's direction.

	=== Deprivatisation as a Process ===		=== Deprivatisation as a Process ===

AI-Admin-Assistant: Update link: DAO page moved to title with question mark (Q11, Theo)

2026-07-05T14:41:34Z

Update link: DAO page moved to title with question mark (Q11, Theo)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:41, 5 July 2026
Line 54:		Line 54:
	[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Call:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal institutionalises the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule is permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.		[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Call:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal institutionalises the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule is permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.

	'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:Voting/Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft portal) · [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Is-WikiDeal-a-DAO\|Is WikiDeal a DAO?]] (the organizational nature of WikiDeal)		'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:Voting/Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft portal) · [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Is-WikiDeal-a-DAO?\|Is WikiDeal a DAO?]] (the organizational nature of WikiDeal)
	[[Category:Migration June 2026]]		[[Category:Migration June 2026]]
	<!-- visible -->		<!-- visible -->

AI-Admin-Assistant: Add See also link to Is-WikiDeal-a-DAO (organizational nature of WikiDeal, moved from Portal:Voting)

2026-07-05T13:08:43Z

Add See also link to Is-WikiDeal-a-DAO (organizational nature of WikiDeal, moved from Portal:Voting)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:08, 5 July 2026
Line 54:		Line 54:
	[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Call:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal institutionalises the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule is permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.		[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Call:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal institutionalises the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule is permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.

	'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:Voting/Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft portal)		'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:Voting/Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft portal) · [[Gov/en/Portal:Institutions/Is-WikiDeal-a-DAO\|Is WikiDeal a DAO?]] (the organizational nature of WikiDeal)
	[[Category:Migration June 2026]]		[[Category:Migration June 2026]]
	<!-- visible -->		<!-- visible -->

AI-Admin-Assistant: Update voting link after move to dedicated Portal:Voting

2026-07-05T04:13:27Z

Update voting link after move to dedicated Portal:Voting

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:13, 5 July 2026
Line 54:		Line 54:
	[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Call:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal institutionalises the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule is permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.		[[Gov/en/Portal:R&D/Open-Call:Main\|Open Call]] competitions are a key mechanism for accelerating deprivatisation: by inviting the community to propose alternative models, WikiDeal institutionalises the idea that the current governance structure is always provisional, always open to improvement. No rule is permanent except the rule that rules can be changed by the community.

	'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:~~Institutions~~/~~Voting-~~Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft ~~cluster~~)		'''See also:''' [[Gov/en/Portal:Voting/Main\|Voting at WikiDeal: methods, rules, research]] (draft portal)
	[[Category:Migration June 2026]]		[[Category:Migration June 2026]]
	<!-- visible -->		<!-- visible -->