These are different from the participation officers from each of the ministries. Or are these...?

Just stop for a second. Just stop for a second.

By acclaim, not election.

Right.

It’s true for all the ministers, right? All the heads of a ministry.

Well, usually...

These are all employees of the government because you are a ministry of the government. Correct or not?

I would assume that, particularly the digital staff...I mean, come on. So...

Yeah.

[laughs]

This is the digital ministry...

You said you had a staff of -- I can’t remember -- you had a staff and interns, and some of them were...There was 35 of one and 25 of the other. [laughs] I can’t remember what. Particularly the staff, these staff, I’m assuming, are staff of you as technology ...

I am curious, from a more traditional government and organizational thing. Overwhelmingly, I sense what you’re doing there is more volunteer/open-space/community. It’s just sort of happening. People are moving through different functions, and the whole thing emerges, very much like the Occupy movement was, or my Great Peace March experience, ...

[laughs]

Yes, and started playing Magic.

OK. There’s so much material in my world, for whatever reason. A lot of Austria, and Germany, and Switzerland ....

You’re fluent in that?

Before getting into some of the major things, I had some leftover bits and pieces I was curious about from our earlier things. First of all, I’m curious. You say that English is your fifth or sixth language. I go, "What are the languages that you know, and how well ...

Globally speaking, not too far away. [laughs]

Hi, glad to meet you. There’s a bunch of things I’d love to talk about, about Pol.is, in the midst of all this.

Provides a model for engaging with legislative structure that is complementary and engages the people. That’s this big realization that’s sort of obvious, but I didn’t have it as a realization before. The legislature is rooted in the people, whereas the bureaucracy is rooted in the stakeholders. It’s almost specific.

There’s a lot of stuff from the British Columbia thing in there I recognized. This gives some interesting precedent for something if you have a really major issue, and constitutional things are always really major, but they’re not the only really major things, for overall guidance from the citizenry to ...

Then the regulation is drafted and sent back through the process to be worked over. It’d be nice if this constitution stuff went back and forth a few times.

In a funny way, this is similar in the...What’s not there is the back and forth between the Parliament. I’m just thinking about the way vTaiwan operates in the regulatory realm. A lot of work goes on, which includes both the stakeholders and the regulators in creating stuff.

Interesting. The British Columbia one didn’t have any legislators in it. It was pure citizens.

This is similar, in a sense, to the Iceland/Ireland constitutional thing, which you’d have legislators and citizens involved in it. This is like doing your exercises prior to doing the high jump.

It’s not binding, and it’s not merely informative. It’s working towards the high chance of both the public and the Parliament passing it.

But it’s very close, and it does have a kind of a stakeholder-y...Are the legislators going to be ultimately deciding this? This is to inform legislation?

[laughs] They could probably use some of this stuff in St. Petersburg.

Okey-dokey.

Chat’ll be there for people, too. [laughs] Audrey is a stickler for transparency. Everything should be available, posted online for anybody.

You’re recording always.

...if everything goes right, you want to set your recording? I’m recording mine at my end.

Bye-bye.

Thank you.

Thank you.

He’s going to be visiting with him, I may have a chance to talk with him, also, in that time. I’m more interested in seeing what comes out of the discussion that wasn’t there at the start.

If you look at that page 7 or 8, whatever it was in the thing that I sent, 10-page thing, it has my thoughts there. As usual I would love to be in conversation with him, which I may when I go up there, at the end of April to ...

I will watch this video again, get myself sorted out and have a new set of questions.

It’s fun having you involved in it. I would love to have you also if you can.

I am hoping to be in Seattle to see Audrey while I’m there. Next week, I’m hoping to have another call like this. Audrey says the week or two after that, we won’t be able to do it, but your Friday, my Thursday on next week, I’ll be here at ...

Are you going to be in Seattle by any chance?

OK, we’re on...

Actually, it’s your...

...who is voting most like other people and studying that person’s responses. Anyway, I think your time is practically up. Our time is practically up.

I feel like there’s something like that the pol.is could do...

If they have 1,000 people working in on whatever the question is, then all in groups of 10s, they will pick those people who are the most reflective of the group mind for a next level of groups. One person from each group, and that’s the person who’s picked from ...

The ideal person would be the person who always chooses the proposal everybody else chooses, and their proposal is the one everybody else chooses. That person has the most points in the group mind.

They’re watching whose proposal does each person choose to revise. Out of those two dimensions, they are seeing whose mind seems to reflect the group’s mind.

It was noting in that cycle who in the group tended to be chosen. That’s right. After everybody’d write a proposal, everybody would have to pick one of the proposals to revise. The software is watching whose proposal are most people choosing to revise. That’s one thing it’s watching.