- Apr 29, 2017
Right so the problem is getting enough people to volunteer to do this. If you see below, it is setup in such a form that there are 2 people who both come to a fully independent decision and then another person who looks at both of their decisions and reasons and all other information and then makes their own decision. If they are all in agreement it either passes or fails, if there is a dispute then they all come together and talk it out. A little of that information is either slightly misleading or redacted so don't read too much into that, it does need to be edited but that is the general flow. I think with this kind of setup it is pretty good.Don't get me wrong I really like this proposal but it seems centralized and undemocratic. Since we're working with a courtroom metaphor have you considered having a jury of dash holding volunteers with one of your judges acting as the qualified and vetted foreman? That way you could have a large pool, majority voting and a natural recruiting ground for judges/foremen. Something to think about perhaps.