…to travel and to also reach out to people who are not so much online, reach out to different generations.

Who participates in the conversation? I know you constantly trying to…

So there’s not too much expectation on the quality of the conversation because then a quality deliberation can take place afterwards?

That’s great. Let’s go back to this notion of conversation. You don’t use the term deliberation very often.

Where have they been developed, these tools? Where do they come from?

What kind of tools?

I know in France there are many people who have switched back to Decidim , and for instance, the Democracy OS now that you…

That’s interesting. All right. You know I don’t code, and I don’t understand a lot of what this question probably means, but why do you still stick to Pol.is, whereas other tools have been designed? What do you think of Decidim , for instance?

…different values, then democracy had to be brought back to the family context as well.

It means that, in a way, if the democracy is conversation between people from…

Of course, right. Another thing about this idea of watershed is I heard that also because of what happened then, there is this kind of new resolution among a lot of especially young people to talk more with their parents…

They discovered that they could really be alienated from their family members over this issue.

I’m asking this because I have met some Taiwanese friends. Some of them seem to say that it was sort of a watershed.

Yeah?

How did it feel for the team and for people being involved in this innovation lab and the vTaiwan process, and so on…? Obviously, you could do something, but wasn’t it a bit frustrating to see this massive polarization of a society over these debates?

[laughs]

When did you have this conversation?

Since you have this other process, could you…I mean, what happened? What happened on your side at the time?

Many citizen’s initiatives.

When there was a discussion about the same-sex marriage, there was a citizen initiative, right?

That’s a good answer. Maybe you partly answered my question already, because conflict is also part of democracy, right?

Yes, and to avoid the trap of polarization and so on.

“…values,” yes. Democracy is a conversation, but I remember you always talk about consensus, and trying to, for instance, choosing pol.is because it was designed to be a consensus.

Very interesting. Regarding this idea of conversation, I think in the president’s inaugural speech, I found this quote. She said, “Democracy is a conversation among many different…”

…improving democracy and having people with different partisan convictions talk together.

What happens on Wednesdays is a lot about…

It’s really what we’re going to be talking about?

That’s where I’m going, here. I’m going tonight.

You mentioned that there’s debate on how to improve democracy. How does it take place? Is it an ongoing conversation?

What are the main evolutions of the process?

When I first met you, you were already using vTaiwan, and I guess it’s been used many more times.

Re-presenting. Now you, to me, you’re obviously working here. You’re located in Taiwan, but there is so much global dimension in what you’re doing. Are you also thinking of what you’re representing in terms of global citizenship?

Your role is not a representative, but an observer.

Not to invent, but to improve that or encourage it more, or make it more inclusive. What you’re doing is really making the connections, making sure that it has some impact.

You didn’t really need to…

What you’re saying – as you know I really don’t know the Taiwan system very well – at the local level, before you were here, people already had possibility to locally talk about their needs.

Would you say that your position allows you to represent some people or some values that were underrepresented before? Do you accept this term of representation?

Is there a really good word in Chinese to describe this that we don’t have in English?

You would reject the term, for instance, cooptation.

Mm-hmm. All right. So you are saying that you have worked with, not for the government.

Of course, of course. But then, how does it feel to be part of a government as an anarchist, whether conservative or not?

Yes. Conservative anarchist.

But you also used the term anarchist.

OK, exceptional. When I first met you, you described yourself as a civic hacker.

You really managed to work on the binding effect. Right?

What is your objective? Is it to train everyone to work together? Or do you have different steps, and maybe your first objective is to train, maybe, civil service first and civil servants? Then, obviously, the civil society, which is already vibrant, and then more people to get involved?

You’re really giving the space for innovation to happen, bringing different actors together.

I understand you’re putting everyone together.

Are there online spaces as well?

Good. That’s very good. Here, we’re in the Social Innovation Lab. But in your message, you said, “Let’s meet at the PDIS.” What are these two?