Accountability system within a Technate

by Jure Sah

Part 1 - Terminology

The system is developed as the smallest common denominator that fills the requirements explained in the introduction. We use the following basic concepts, with the following terminology:

Part 2 - Mechanism of action

  1. Any person or organization can define new Principles or Classes.
  2. An Impartial Observer periodically assesses people and organizations to determine which Principles and thus Classes they have already reached, and which they have not.
  3. Any person or organization may specify Principles and/or Classes to be used as criteria on which people and organizations are allowed to cooperate with them. If a person or organization does not reach the Principle or Class required by this person or organization, according to the Impartial Observer, they may not cooperate or use each other's services in any way.

Part 3 - Effects on society

The presumed effects this system would have on society are that it would allow people to directly define what rules exist within their society. More-so, it would not be a "rule of the majority" system as it would allow people to form separate groups with different rules within the overall system. Any group with a population large and diverse enough to sustain itself could exist within such a system. On the other hand, no group with insufficient population will be able to force other groups who do not agree with it's existence to sustain it.

It is expected that Principles and Classes which will be poorly defined, when a better alternative exists, will not be widely adopted and will thus phase out eventually by themselves.

Also, defining the Principle as a goal rather than a rule, removes some of the negative stigma associated with the "nonconforming". Where is a typical system of Law, laws are rules to which the majority of the population conforms[3] and a clear distinction is made between people who abide by the law and people who do not, in a system of Principles, nobody conforms to all Principles and striving to do so is an ongoing process for everybody.

Part 4 - Structuring and formalization

Example of a Class
Example of a Class

The reason for the existence of Classes and Tags is simplification:

Further formalization is required in order to prevent abuse:

Part 5 - Practical implementation

A practical implementation of a system which allows the authoring and storage of Principles, Classes and Tags, by the aforementioned system can be found here:

The implementation is designed to function in such a way that it can be used by anyone, not only Technocrats, to define the rules of operation within their society, therefore the Principles and Classes listed within the implementation are not necessarily ones approved of by the Network of European Technocrats.

The implementation provides access to individual Principles, Classes or Tags text, including all the relevant links, as well as facilities required to enter them. The implementation also provides RSS feeds of Principles and Classes tagged by a specific person or organization, by the digital signature's fingerprint, intended to be embedded into remote websites. The implementation's source code is available on the site.

Conclusion

While the theory itself is sound, further simulation may be required to ensure that there are no exploitable faults. The use of the Sequence Director for the Impartial Observer may be problematic, primarily because it may be hard to tell if (s)he is truly impartial and also because of the sheer amount of work to be done once there are thousands of Principles and Classes to be checked on a total population of a Technate. Study on the possibility of automatisation is under way.

Also, the adoption level of the implemented system was very low, indicating the unsuitability of the system for small organizations, such as the ones it has been presented to thus far. Small organizations tend to function by verbal agreement and subjective determination of trustworthiness and do not need to document their principles of operation or have explicit mechanisms to ensure compliance. Further work may be required to make the system more convenient.

References

  1. Improving public management by Les Metcalfe and Sue Richards, ISBN 0803984006, ISBN 9780803984004
  2. Schedler Andreas: The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies, Conceptualizing Accountability (1999), pages 13–28, ISBN 1555877737
  3. Georgiadis, General Principles of Civil Law, 19; Washofsky, Taking Precedent Seriously, 7

Discuss