Sense-making needs constant iteration, flexibility, and innovation to succeed. Pol.is is optimized to facilitate meaningful discussion and cut through conflict.
- Pol.is manifests human cooperation across differences, rather than optimizing clicks, views, or headcounts, which thrive on competition and polarization and often foster conflict.
- Pol.is conversations do not allow for replies.
- Po.is employs diversity scoring.
- Pol.is is designed to overturn existing power structures and hierarchies.
Check out the Collective Decision-Making section of this report about participatory governance in Taiwan, where almost half of the 23-million population has participated in governmental Pol.is conversations.
Across the powers driving GitcoinDAO - at the leadership, contributor, and community level - we could utilize Pol.is conversations to form shared goals. Specifically, conversations around grant round eligibility and structures, workstream objectives, and product and engineering road-mapping might be powerful pilot areas for Pol.is.
Additionally, we can consider applying RadicalxChange Voice more, which is a combination of liquid democracy, Pol.is, and quadratic voting. However, the overhead cost for managing RxC Voice processes is slightly higher than with simple Pol.is conversations. Anyway, I’m curious to see what the ongoing RxC Voice experiments in MMM bring about @Fred, @seanmac, and @seedphrase.