What I said still applies. DT1 is (trying to be) a democracy. You can't step out of the democracy and still expect it to work.
Is that the definition of democracy nowadays? Where congress members get elected by the votes of other congress members, which means each DT member is like a state. I wonder who are non DT, ordinary members? I never understood western "democracy" or any democracy if it's even a thing, that's why I have joined the "revolution".
[...]
If I may get slightly out of topic...
Democracy can simply means a system which determined by the "citizen" of the said system, they elect their representatives, from their own, where they determine the outcome of the said "poll" instead of those representatives being automatically elected by birthright like monarch or dictatorship.
And this is held true, if we look at how the process of DT election, especially the one I marked in bold.
[...]
I will periodically (maybe every month) be reconstructing the default trust list to include everyone who matches these criteria:
- If rank was determined solely using earned merit, then you must be of at least Member rank.
- You must have been online sometime within the last 3 days.
- Your trust list must include at least 10 users, not including ~distrust entries.
- You must not be banned or manually blacklisted from selection.
- You must have posted sometime within the last 30 days.
-
You must have at least 10 people directly trusting you each with an earned merit of at least 10, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited. -
You must have at least 2 people directly trusting you with an earned merit of at least 250, not including merit you yourself sent. These "votes" are limited.[...]
As you can see, the only way to be eligible to be a DT [well, DT1] is by having the "citizen" voting for them, this is not DT electing each other [congress members get elected by the votes of other congress members]. In fact, there is no criteria in the system that require a DT1 to be elected by other DT1. IIRC, there was a situation where someone without any other DT trusting him and he still got elected as a DT1.
If you're talking about "dis-votes" instead of "votes" though, i.e.: where DT members "elects" another DT to be kicked out of the system, was it not the very practice of democracy too? There is no absolute power where someone can not unilaterally kick someone else, there has to be an enough agreement between the DT to kick the said user [who abuses their power, if I may add] from the system.
