Turned module database from csv to files with pages, moved democraticmediums here

_data/modules.csv

@@ -1,70 +0,0 @@
-name,id,description,url,source,type
-Board,board,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/board/,Democratic Mediums,structure
-Bureaucracy,bureaucracy,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/bureaucracy/,Democratic Mediums,structure
-Committee,committee,,,,structure
-Executive,executive,,,,structure
-Federation,federation,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/federation/,Democratic Mediums,structure
-Judiciary,judiciary,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/judiciary/,Democratic Mediums,structure
-Legislative,legislative,,,,structure
-Multicameralism,multicameralism,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/multicameralism/,Democratic Mediums,structure
-Platform,platform,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/platform/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Rights,rights,,,,structure
-Separation of powers,separation_of_powers,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/separation_of_powers/,Democratic Mediums,structure
-Audit,audit,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/audit/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Canvassing,canvassing,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/canvassing/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Caucus,caucus,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/caucus/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Coalition,coalition,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/coalition/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Code of conduct,code_of_conduct,,,,process
-Consensus process,consensus,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/consensus/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Constitution,constitution,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/constitution/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Debate,debate,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/debate/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Delegation,delegation,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/delegation/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Do-ocracy,do-ocracy,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/do-ocracy/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Eloquence,eloquence,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/eloquence/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Exclusion,exclusion,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/exclusion/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Fact Finding,fact_finding,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/fact_finding/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Lobbying,lobbying,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/lobbying/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Membership,membership,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/membership/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Meritocracy,meritocracy,,,,process
-Ownership,ownership,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/ownership/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Petition,petition,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/petition/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Polling,polling,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/polling/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Precedent,precedent,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/precedent/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Proof of work,proof_of_work,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/proof_of_work/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Proportional representation,proportional_representation,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/proportional_representation/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Refusal,refusal,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/refusal/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Representation,representation,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/representation/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Reputation,reputation,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/reputation/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Restorative justice,restorative_justice,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/restorative_justice/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Sortition,sortition,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/sortition/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Stake weight,stake_weight,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/stake_weight/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Term limits,term_limit,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/term_limit/,Democratic Mediums,process
-Approval voting,approval_voting,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/approval_voting/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Autocratic,autocratic,,https://thedecider.app/autocratic-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Avoidant,avoidant,,https://thedecider.app/avoidant-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Condorcet,condorcet,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/condorcet/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Consensus,consensus,,https://thedecider.app/consensus-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Consent,consent,,https://thedecider.app/consent-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Consultative,consultative,,https://thedecider.app/consultative-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Continuous voting,continuous_voting,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/continuous_voting/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Delegation,delegation,,https://thedecider.app/delegation-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Democratic,democratic,,https://thedecider.app/democratic-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Disapproval voting,disapproval_voting,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/disapproval_voting/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Holographic consensus,holographic_consensus,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/holographic_consensus/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Lazy consensus,lazy_consensus,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/lazy_consensus/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Lottery voting,lottery_voting,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/lottery_voting/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Majority voting,majority_voting,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/majority_voting/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Quadratic voting,quadratic_voting,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/quadratic_voting/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Range voting,range_voting,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/range_voting/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Ranked choice,ranked_choice,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/ranked_choice/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Referendum,referendum,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/referendum/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Rough consensus,rough_consensus,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/rough_consensus/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Secret ballot,secret_ballot,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/secret_ballot/,Democratic Mediums,decision
-Stochastic,stochastic,,https://thedecider.app/stochastic-decision-making,The Decider,decision
-Friendship,friendship,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/friendship/,Democratic Mediums,culture
-Recess,recess,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/recess/,Democratic Mediums,culture
-Ritual,ritual,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/ritual/,Democratic Mediums,culture
-Secrecy,secrecy,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/secrecy/,Democratic Mediums,culture
-Solidarity,solidarity,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/solidarity/,Democratic Mediums,culture
-Transparency,transparency,,https://democraticmediums.info/mediums/transparency/,Democratic Mediums,culture
-Values,values,,,,culture

_layouts/module.html

@@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
+---
+layout: default
+---
+<article class="post">
+
+  <header class="post-header">
+    <div class="page-type">Module /
+      {{ page.type }}
+      <img title="{{ page.type }}" draggable="false" class="module-logo"
+           {% if page.type == "structure" %}
+           src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/building.svg %}" {% endif %}
+           {% if page.type == "process" %}
+           src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/rotate.svg %}" {% endif %}
+           {% if page.type == "decision" %}
+           src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/thumb-up.svg %}" {% endif %}
+           {% if page.type == "culture" %}
+           src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/palette.svg %}" {% endif %}
+           />
+    </div>
+    <h1 class="post-title">{{ page.title }}</h1>
+  </header>
+
+  
+  
+  <p id="module-summary">{{ page.summary }}</p>
+  
+  <div class="post-content">
+    {{ content }}
+  </div>
+
+</article>

_layouts/rule.html

@@ -596,13 +596,16 @@ https://github.com/Bernardo-Castilho/dragdroptouch -->
 			 style="display:none">
 			<img src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/x.svg %}" /></a>
 		</span>
-		<!-- Load preset modules from _data/modules.csv -->
-		{% for module in site.data.modules %}
-		<span class="module" id="module-{{ module.id }}"
+		<!-- Load preset modules from _modules/ -->
+
+        {% assign modules_array = site.modules | sort: "type" | reverse %}
+		{% for module in modules_array %}
+		<span class="module" id="module-{{ module.title | slugify }}"
 			  draggable="true" ondragstart="drag(event)">
-		  <span id="module-name">{{ module.name }}</span>
+		  <span id="module-title" title="{{ module.summary }}">
+            {{ module.title }}</span>
           <a target="_blank" href="{{ module.url }}">
-            <img title="{{ module.type }}" draggable="false" class="module-logo"
+            <img title="{{ module.type }} (press for info)" draggable="false" class="module-logo"
                  {% if module.type == "structure" %}
                  src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/building.svg %}" {% endif %}
                  {% if module.type == "process" %}

_modules/approval_voting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Approval voting
+permalink: /modules/approval_voting/
+summary: Voters can approve or deny approval for each option.
+type: decision
+---
+
+Approval voting is a form of plurality-majority voting in which each voter either positively or negatively determines all candidates’ aptitude for the job. Rather than only voting for one candidate who would best serve in the role, voters participating in approval voting either give or deny approval for each candidate and may approve as many as they see fit. The candidate with the most approval votes wins.
+
+**Input:** ballot allowing for multiple approval or disapproval votes
+
+**Output:** single- or multiple-winner election based on plurality approval
+
+## Background
+
+Approval voting as we now know it dates back to the work of Steven Brams and other political analysts in the 1970s. Its history can be traced to papal conclaves and Venetian Doge elections in the 13th through 18th centuries. Brams also recognizes its use during elections in 19th century England. 
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Approval voting has merit in its ability to capture the greatest support for a candidate. In elections with three or more candidates, it ensures that one with widespread support will win as opposed to one with default plurality. 
+* Voters may express support for a minority candidate without “wasting” their vote; they may support both a minority and majority candidate. 
+* Approval voting has also been credited with encouraging individuals to vote because a more diverse pool of applicants can be on the ballot. 
+* Negative campaigning may also be less prominent in these systems.
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Voters may engage in "bullet voting," or only demonstrating approval for their top candidate. When this happens in a widespread fashion, the system returns to a standard plurality voting system.
+* Candidates may water down their stances on particular controversial issues to appeal to a wide swath of voters.
+* Can reproduce the issues associated with plurality-majority voting such as unfair representation, wasted votes, and inaccurate party representation.
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Internal and local elections
+* Private society elections such as Mathematical Association of America and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 
+
+### Tools
+
+Structured ballot to facilitate voting by marks, names, written words “yes” or “no,” or selection
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Amy, D. J. (2000). Behind the ballot box: a citizen's guide to voting systems. Greenwood Publishing Group.
+* Brams, S., & Fishburn, P. C. (2007). Approval voting. Springer Science & Business Media.
+
+

_modules/autocracy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Autocracy
+permalink: /modules/autocracy/
+summary: One person holds sole decision-making authority over a certain domain.
+type: structure
+---

_modules/board.md

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Board
+permalink: /modules/board/
+summary: A small group of people shares top-level authority over an organization.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Board governance is the use of a relatively small group of people, appointed or elected, to share authority and responsibility over a particular domain of decisions. Boards are widely used to set policy for corporations, nonprofit organizations, and governmental entities. They are also referred to as "councils," "trustees," or "directors."
+
+Although boards take a wide variety of forms, they typically hold a legislative charge and delegate implementation of policies to a chief executive, whom the board has power to hire and fire. Some boards seek to "speak with one voice" while others make internal differences publicly apparent. Some boards are composed of full-time professionals, while many others involve part-time participation by outsiders to the organization's daily workings.
+
+**Input:** rules for board-member selection, scope of authority, board procedures
+
+**Output:** governing policies, executive delegation
+
+## Background
+
+The centrality of boards has been a presumption for the earliest modern corporate law.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Focuses accountability for organizational behavior
+* Can incorporate greater diversity of opinion than a single leader
+* Holds monitoring power over executive functions
+* May be accountable to constituents through election or political appointment
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Vulnerable to groupthink
+* Outsider board members may have limited institutional knowledge
+* May be unaccountable to constituents due self-appointment and lack of [term limit](term_limit.md)
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Widespread use in various corporate bodies around the world
+
+### Tools
+
+* _Robert's Rules of Order_ is a classic manual for managing board meetings
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Carver, John and Miriam Mayhew Carver. _The Policy Governance Model and the Role of the Board Member_. Second edition. Jossey-Bass, 2009.
+* Gevurtz, Franklin A. "[The Historical and Political Origins of the Corporate Board of Directors](https://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2341&context=hlr)." _Hofstra Law Review_ 33, no. 1 (2004).

_modules/bureaucracy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Bureaucracy
+permalink: /modules/bureaucracy/
+summary: A portion of the system designed to be neutral and insulated from political pressures.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Bureaucracy is a portion of a governance system designed to be neutral and insulated from political pressures. Bureaucracies tend to function on the basis of professionalism and meritocracy, rather than popular preference. They can counterbalance more transient political formations, such as elected officials and referendums.
+
+**Input:** Externally defined priorities, meritocratic internal incentive structures, continuity through political change
+
+**Output:** consistency of service delivery, neutral expertise in the service of popular priorities
+
+## Background
+
+Perhaps the most famous ancient bureaucracy was that developed in China's Han dynasty (202 BCE - 220 AD), which used expertise in Confucian philosophy as the basis for securing government positions. Other ancient governments developed bureaucratic structures as well.
+
+Bureaucracy became a central feature of modern governments and corporations, providing operational continuity alongside policy changes from elected leaders.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Handles matters that require expertise more effectively than elected officials or the population as a whole
+* Can implement controversial policies with limited vulnerability to public pressure
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Can become self-perpetuating, expanding in reach to the point of subjecting political policy-making to undue constraints
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Militaries under control of civilian government
+* Various government ministries throughout the world
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Open badges](https://openbadges.org/) and other certification mechanisms
+* Standardized testing
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Graeber, David. _The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy_. Melville House, 2015.
+* Weber, Max. _Economy and Society_. 1922.

_modules/canvassing.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Canvassing
+permalink: /modules/canvassing/
+summary: Peer-to-peer campaigning to achieve popular support.
+type: process
+---
+
+Canvassing is an activity performed by individuals wishing to reach others for a campaign or cause. Election cycles, grassroots movements and fundraising initiatives are just a few examples of situations in which canvassing might be implemented. By knocking on doors and speaking with individuals, canvassers hope to influence undecided voters for the candidate they are representing, raise awareness about an issue, and increase civic engagement.
+
+**Input:** team of representatives, informational materials, information on geographic areas to canvas & their demographics
+
+**Output:** persuading voters to act in specific ways and support particular causes, increasing political engagement, increasing face-to-face interaction between candidates, representatives, and voters
+
+## Background
+
+Canvassing as a strategy to reach potential supporters has a long history. In the Roman Republic, candidates would introduce themselves to individuals at the Forum and attempt to gain their political support. In Elizabethan-era England, candidates sought to determine whether they had enough votes to win before announcing interest in a Parliament seat. Canvassing thus served as an indicator of whether or not a candidate had enough support to continue running; if they did not secure enough votes, they would drop out. 
+
+In the United States, an extremely low voter turnout in 1996 led to studies on the effects of canvassing. Canvassing has become more widely practiced since the early 2000s.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Increases political engagement
+* Informs publics on particular issues
+* Increases identification between voters and particular campaigns, candidates, and causes
+
+### Oversights
+
+* High cost due to small scope of individual reach and modes of persuasion
+* Diverts agency of voters from learning information for themselves and instead relies on canvassers for targeted information
+* Studies on effectiveness yield contradictory results
+* Can result in discriminatory targeting of particular communities
+* Has a history of corruption and bribery to gain votes
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Canvassing is used in societies around the world where there is some form of participatory governance
+
+### Tools
+
+* A variety of canvassing apps enable canvassers to use mobile devices to better target and organize their efforts
+* Databases with voter information inform geographic areas chosen by canvassers
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Green, D. P., Gerber, A. S. and Nickerson, D. W. (2003), Getting Out the Vote in Local Elections: Results from Six Door‐to‐Door Canvassing Experiments. Journal of Politics, 65: 1083-1096. doi:10.1111/1468-2508.t01-1-00126
+* [Lobbying](lobbying.md) is a more formal, structured form of direct persuasion within political institutions
+* Nielsen, Rasmus Kleis (5 February 2012). Ground Wars: Personalized Communication in Political Campaigns. Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-15305-6.

_modules/caucus.md

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Caucus
+permalink: /modules/caucus/
+summary: A semi-formal group of people organized around shared priorities.
+type: structure
+---
+
+A caucus refers to the meeting of a group of people to determine shared priorities. Common connotations include:
+
+* Members of a political party may meet to discuss issues, lobby, or narrow down a pool of candidates
+* Members of a legislature may meet to decide upon an agenda based on shared goals, such as the Congressional Hispanic Caucus in the US Congress
+
+**Input:** an engaged and informed community with shared concerns
+
+**Output:** a meeting of members of a particular group to achieve a specific goal based on common interests
+
+## Background
+
+The modern history of the caucus in the United States dates back to 1763, when John Adams used the term in a journal entry to refer to the process of pre-selecting candidates; this is the first known use of the word in reference to the modern American meaning, though the process was not a public one at the time. New Zealand began using the term in the 1890s to refer to members of parliament while the UK adopted the term in the late 19th century to refer to negatively connoted systems of control.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Can spark productive conversation and informed discussion of important topics 
+* Can lead to consensus and concrete plan for addressing concerns
+* May engage diverse members of society in decision-making processes
+* Can provide a space for niche communities with particular missions
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Public caucusing may have low turnout, leading to decision-making based on the opinions and views of only a portion of the population
+* It can be a time-consuming and costly process due to intensive organizational needs
+* Caucusing may lack anonymity; participants may have to make public declaration of their opinions
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Some states use caucus procedures to choose presidential candidates or other elected officials, such as Iowa and Maine
+* The Black Caucus, Hispanic Caucus, and Out of Iraq Caucus are but a few congressional caucuses that share values, goals, and visions
+* Other groups use caucusing as a means of organizing such as the Global Nursing Caucus or LGBTQ Caucus
+
+### Tools
+
+* Online resources of flyers, information, and procedures exist for interest groups looking to form a caucus, usually provided by national organizations or pre-existing large-scale caucuses
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Masters, J. & Ratnam, G. (2016). “The U.S. Presidential Nominating Process.” Council on Foreign Relations.
+* Panagopoulos, C. (2010). Are Caucuses Bad for Democracy?. Political Science Quarterly, 125: 425-442. doi:10.1002/j.1538-165X.2010.tb00680.x
+* Redlawsk, D. P., Tolbert, C. J., & Donovan, T. (2011). Why Iowa?: how caucuses and sequential elections improve the presidential nominating process.      University of Chicago Press.
+

_modules/coalition.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Coalition
+permalink: /modules/coalition/
+summary: A network of diverse participants working toward a common aim.
+type: structure
+---
+
+A coalition refers to the unification of groups, organizations, or individuals to work toward a shared goal as a team. Coalitions generally fall into two camps: internal or external. Internal coalitions are comprised of individuals who are already part of an organization, such as a workplace, while external coalitions are comprised of members of diverse organizations who join together to combine efforts. Coalitions exist at every level of governance, from local and community-based to international.
+
+**Input:** individuals who have a shared mission, connect with each other, and want to enact something; a trigger that inspires formation (i.e. an event, a threat, or a piece of controversial legislation)
+
+**Output:** a partnership of organizations or individuals working together to achieve a goal
+
+## Background
+
+Coalitions are traditionally associated with defeating a common enemy. Coalition warfare dates back to ancient Greece, when a coalition of city-states came together to ward off the Persian Empire.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Increases audience and reach of a project
+* Legitimizes efforts and boosts accountability
+* Creates a larger pool of resources – both monetarily and in terms of human experience, knowledge, and specialization
+* Increases productivity and capacity for putting pressure on institutions
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Power may be unequally distributed among organizations within the coalition
+* Consensus and compromise can be time-consuming and difficult to achieve
+* May hinder direct work for cause due to bureaucratic processes
+* Members may have to compromise their position and its intensity for the greater purpose of the coalition
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Coalitions frequently form in multiparty political systems like parliamentary governments
+* Civic causes often have a coalition such as the Coalition for the Homeless
+
+### Tools
+
+Online toolkits for building a coalition can be found easily, outlining structures, systems of governance, and steps for building; the National Democratic Institute partnered with the Oslo Center for Peace and Human Rights to create a manual entitled *Coalitions: A Guide for Political Parties* with extensive information on best practices.
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Strength in Numbers: A Guide to Building Community Coalitions. (2003). Community Catalyst Report.
+* Childress, B. (2019). Coalition Building. Reference for Business.
+
+

_modules/code_of_conduct.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Code of Conduct
+permalink: /modules/Code_of_Conduct/
+summary: Participants agree to abide by certain standards or face certain consequences.
+type: process
+---
+
+
+**Input:** 
+
+**Output:** 
+
+## Background
+
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* 
+
+### Oversights
+
+* 
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Compassion Contract](https://citizendiscourse.org/compassion-contract/)
+* [Contributor Covenant](http://contributor-covenant.org)
+
+## Further resources
+
+* 
+

_modules/committee.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Committee
+permalink: /modules/committee/
+summary: A sub-group of the community tasked with a particular role or domain of authority.
+type: structure
+---

_modules/condorcet.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Condorcet
+permalink: /modules/condorcet/
+summary: Selects the option that would win a majority of votes against each of the other options.
+type: decision
+---
+
+Condorcet is an election method that selects the candidate, if such a candidate exists, that would win a [majority vote](majority_voting.md) against all other candidates. Ballots may take the form of either a single [ranked choice](ranked_choice.md) vote or a sequence of runoffs.
+
+There is not always a "Condorcet winner," and various implementations provide differing methods of determining a winner in such cases.
+
+**Input:** preferential vote or runoffs
+
+**Output:** Condorcet winner or circular paradox
+
+## Background
+
+The Condorcet method takes its name from an early promoter, the 18th-century French mathematician Marie Jean Antoine Nicolas Caritat, who was the Marquis de Condorcet. The method itself was [first described by Ramon Llull](https://www.math.uni-augsburg.de/htdocs/emeriti/pukelsheim/2001a.html) in 1299. A version of it is used in Robert's Rules of Order, first published in 1876.
+
+Recently, it has attracted the interest of software developers and has been adopted by several prominent Free Software communities and Pirate Party groups.
+
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Prevents some potential for gaming that is possible in other voting methods
+
+### Oversights
+
+* The complexity of the system may lead to confusion
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Free Software communities
+    - [Debian Project](https://www.debian.org/vote/)
+    - [Python Software Foundation voting process](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-8001/)
+    - Wikimedia Foundation
+* Pirate Party of Sweden uses it for primary elections
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Condorcet Internet Voting Service](https://civs.cs.cornell.edu/) at Cornell University
+
+## Further resources
+
+* "[Condorcet method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method)" at Wikipedia
+* Schulze, Markus. "[A new monotonic, clone-independent, reversal symmetric, and condorcet-consistent single-winner election method](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00355-010-0475-4)." _Social Choice and Welfare_ 36, no. 2 (February 2011).

_modules/consensus.md

@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Consensus
+permalink: /modules/consensus/
+summary: All participants must agree on decisions that affect the entire group.
+type: decision
+---
+
+# Consensus process
+
+Consensus is a form of group decision-making that reflects the perceived best possible scenario for the greatest number of people. If an individual or a minority cannot support the decision, it can be blocked. Consensus and unanimity are not the same; the decision-rule decided upon by the organization provides the threshold for how many individuals  or groups must agree to the consensus for it to be implemented.
+
+**Input:** a group of individuals willing to collaborate and compromise for a decision with an eye toward unity; individuals with diverse delegated roles like facilitator, timekeeper, and notetaker (though positions and responsibilities may vary among groups); a decision-rule agreed upon by the organization
+
+**Output:** a decision that addresses the needs of the greatest number of people in the group based on compromise; an equitable environment for stakeholders
+
+## Background
+
+In Western contexts, consensus as a decision-making process dates back to the 17th century Quakers. Other religious groups have history of consensus as decision making, including Anabaptists. A process similar, though not exactly reflective of modern consensus, was prevalent among indigenous groups like the [Ayamara, Haudenosaunee, and Saharan San bushmen]( https://rhizomenetwork.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/history_of_consensus_jan2012_v2.pdf). These groups had governance processes that strove to address the needs of the greatest number of people through participatory culture. 
+
+The 1960’s and ‘70’s demonstrated modern consensus process in the United States through social movements like the Civil Rights Movement and Women’s Movement. Later, movements like the World Trade Organization protests in Seattle and Occupy movement around the globe established a strong foundation in consensus decision-making.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Strives to be inclusive and egalitarian, encouraging all members of the group to collaborate in decision forming
+* Protects minority opinions
+* Provides an opportunity for a win-win situation through community team-building that occurs through productive dialogue involved in the consensus process
+* Encourages all members to have a stake in the decision
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Individuals might feel fearful and discouraged to express their real beliefs or concerns on an issue if a majority already agrees on a decision
+* Marginalized groups’ opinions and beliefs may be demonized and their opinions ignored
+* The decision that is most fair may not actually be the best decision for the group; compromise could exclude important aspects
+* In business setting, hierarchy and seniority may amplify certain employees’ voices and undermine others’
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+While consensus is still used in social movements, many co-operative businesses find it an important hallmark of their organizational decision-making. 
+* The [Boulder Housing Coalition]( https://boulderhousingcoalition.org/resources/consensus/) in Colorado is a co-op that uses consensus as a self-governing process.
+* [Ottawa Valley Food Co-Op]( https://www.ottawavalleyfood.org/images/PDF/OVFC%20Business%20Plan%20-%20Full%20Draft%20-%20October%2018%202015.pdf) in Canada uses consensus decision-making
+* [Radical Routes]( https://www.radicalroutes.org.uk/aims-and-principles.html) is a “network of housing and worker co-operatives working for radical social change” in Britain that operates primary on consensus decisions by all network members.
+
+### Tools
+
+* (ConsensusDecisionMaking.org) offers a one-hour training video on the basic principles of consensus
+* A [checklist]( https://leadtogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/COnsensus-checklist.pdf) for the consensus process
+* This [handbook]( https://leadtogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/on-conflict-and-consensus.pdf) on consensus decision-making
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Loomio, "[Consent decision making improves group outcomes](https://help.loomio.org/en/guides/consent_process/)"
+* [Rhizome Guide to A History of Consensus]( https://leadtogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/on-conflict-and-consensus.pdf). (2010). Rhizome Co-operative. 
+* [Consensus Decision Making]( https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/consensus). Seeds for Change.
+* Pérez, I. J., Cabrerizo, F. J., Alonso, S., Dong, Y. C., Chiclana, F., & Herrera-Viedma, E. (2018). On dynamic consensus processes in group decision making problems. Information Sciences, 459, 20-35.

_modules/constitution.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Consensus
+permalink: /modules/constitution/
+summary: A shared set of agreements underlies all future ones and is harder to change than other agreements.
+type: structure
+---
+
+A constitution is a method for outlining the limits and regulations of an organization, nation, or other group’s governance. It may be composed as a single, succinct document or comprised of a set of acts, treaties, and particular court cases. 
+
+**Input:** mission, purpose, and goals of an organization; an understanding of how the organization will function; long-term conception of the organization
+
+**Output:** document(s) defining the scope of the group, its structures, functions, and eventual goals
+
+## Background
+
+Constitutions have a long history, with the oldest evidence dating back to Hammurabi's code of justice issued in modern-day Iraq circa 2300 BC. Well-known ancient codes of this nature include the Hittite code, and the oral codes of Athens.
+
+Detailed modern, Western constitutions began with Oliver Cromwell’s Instrument of Government in England in the early 1650s. Most of the original thirteen American colonies adopted their own constitutions, with Connecticut’s being the oldest known North American constitution.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Constitutions provide rules and checkpoints for an organization
+* Keep power structures under control through division of powers into various branches
+* Many include division of powers into various branches 
+* Some groups, though not all, have a legal body to interpret the constitution and declare when acts violate it
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Many constitutions are difficult to change, preventing members of the organization to update and modernize them 
+* Many include a “state of emergency” provision that can be used to violate the normally implemented rules should the president decide to do so, allowing an abuse of power 
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Nations and smaller local organizations use constitutions as a means of governance
+* School clubs, international groups, and nonprofit organizations often use constitutions to outline their purpose and keep mechanisms of power in check, such as:
+    * [Kiwanis International](https://www.kiwanis.org/docs/default-source/training/governance/kiwanis-international/kiwanis-international-bylaws.pdf?sfvrsn=c1b22cef_20)
+    * [National Medical Association](https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.nmanet.org/resource/resmgr/Docs/HOD/nma_constitution.pdf)
+    * [American Civil Liberties Union](https://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/about/aclu_bylaws.pdf)
+
+### Tools
+
+* University of Southern Indiana, "[How to Write a Constitution and Bylaws](https://www.usi.edu/media/959699/how_to_create_your_constitution_and_by-laws.pdf)"
+
+## Further resources
+
+Kerwin, C. M., & Furlong, S. R. (2018). _Rulemaking: How government agencies write law and make policy_. Cq Press.
+
+Anckar, D. (2015). Prohibiting Amendment: the Use of Absolute Rigidity in the Constitutions of the Countries of the World. _Perspectivas-Journal of Political Science_, (14).

_modules/continuous_voting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Continuous voting
+permalink: /modules/continuous_voting/
+summary: Voting can occur anytime, not just on a fixed schedule, and decisions can change if participants alter their votes.
+type: decision
+---
+
+# Continuous voting
+
+<!---https://medium.com/giveth/conviction-voting-34019bd17b10-->
+
+Continuous voting is a system in which the vote occurs on a continuous or frequent basis, rather than during discrete election periods.
+
+**Input:** Ballot, randomized or universal electorate, easy mechanism for vote changing
+
+**Output:** Frequent or real-time results
+
+## Background
+
+Continuous voting mechanisms have been proposed in a variety of forms and contexts, though largely only since the advent of Internet technology that would streamline vote-changing and counting. [Delegation](delegation.md) systems like "liquid democracy" generally use continuous voting.
+
+Economics blogger Steve Randy Waldman [proposed](https://www.interfluidity.com/v2/7043.html) in 2018 a model by which random subsets of the electorate would be polled on their representatives at frequent intervals. The same year, BlockScience CEO Michael Zargham [proposed](https://github.com/BlockScience/conviction/blob/master/social-sensorfusion.pdf) a model called "conviction voting," in which votes grow stronger the longer the remain with a particular choice, and greater stake in the system increases vote strength, among other properties. It has been [adopted](https://medium.com/giveth/conviction-voting-34019bd17b10) as part of the blockchain-based Commons Stack project.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Provides feedback closer to real-time
+* Reduces vulnerability to timed attacks on democratic deliberation
+
+### Oversights
+
+* No fixed terms of elected cohorts, reducing ability to plan for a session in office
+* Can instill greater insecurity among elected representatives
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* [Commons Stack](https://commons-stack.gitbook.io/wiki/) (in development)
+* Various pirate parties using liquid democracy
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Democracy Earth](https://democracy.earth) implements liquid democracy
+
+## Further resources
+
+* [Delegation](delegation.md)
+* Kay. May 29, 2019. "[Conviction Voting: From ad-hoc voting to continuous voting](https://medium.com/giveth/conviction-voting-34019bd17b10)." Giveth blog.

_modules/debate.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Debate
+permalink: /modules/debate/
+summary: Deliberation occurs through a structured presentation of arguments.
+type: process
+---
+
+Debate is an activity in which two parties discuss opposing sides of an issue, event, or situation to argue a viewpoint. Often occurring in formal settings, debates frequently involve an audience and a moderator, though these features are not absolutely crucial to the process. Logic, credibility, and emotional appeal form the foundation for a well-formed, productive debate.
+
+**Input:** parties willing to engage in civic discussion; an issue with relevant yet opposing viewpoints
+
+**Output:** a formal discussion or conversation to argue a particular purpose
+
+## Background
+
+The most well-known history of debate goes back to ancient Greece and Rome when political opponents went head-to-head in public settings. Debate was also an important aspect of ancient Indian civilization; philosophical debates surrounding the meaning of scripture emerged as the Shastrartha. 
+The first televised U.S. presidential debate took place between Richard Nixon and John F. Kennedy in 1960.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Debates require an issue to be broken down into their foundational parts, leading to a greater understanding of it on a fundamental level 
+* The information communicated through a debate can allow the audience more agency to make well-informed decisions 
+* Organizations and governments can improve electoral and decision processes through engaging in debate that better informs their actions
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Critics of debate find that complex issues can easily be reduced into black and white answers; political debates automatically divide issues along partisan lines which can lead to a mere reinforcement of preconceived notions based on political leanings
+* Finding a completely neutral moderator can be a near-impossible task that affects the outcome of the debate based on connotative phrasing of questions and biased facilitation 
+* Cherry-picking facts to support a position can easily lead to misrepresentation of the issue
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Debates can take place in many settings. Political debates allow candidates to demonstrate and support their views on particular issues. Debate teams help students hone skills in argumentation, public speaking, and research. [Organizations can debate](https://mason.gmu.edu/~smuir/debate.htm) internal situations to reach greater agreement about a situation and decide on important issues. 
+
+* The American Physical Therapy Association hosts an annual [Oxford Debate](https://www.apta.org/PTinMotion/News/2017/6/30/OxfordDebate/)
+* Individuals running for organizational boards, such [Board of Trustees at Michigan State University](https://www.wkar.org/post/msu-board-trustees-debate-record-october-12-2018#stream/0), often engage in debate 
+
+### Tools
+
+* A variety of resources exist online to help student debaters, including outlines and templates like the [Chicago Debates resource guide](https://resources.chicagodebates.org/debaters/debate-resources/) 
+* Visual resources can help map out logic and arguments
+    * [Debatemap.live](https://debatemap.live/) is a site that breaks down arguments into “nodes,” or simplified pieces of information that connect to form a visual representation of the argument
+    * [Argunet](http://www.argunet.org/editor/) is an open source software that allows users to create maps of their debates as individuals or teams 
+* Nonprofit, nonpartisan site [Pro/Con](https://www.procon.org/) offers opposing viewpoints and information on frequently debated issues
+* Online spaces allow community members to debate current issues, like the New York Times page [Room for Debate](https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate)
+
+## Further resources
+
+NYC Urban Debate League. (2017). History's Great Debates. Retrieved July 10, 2019, from https://blog.debate.nyc/historical-debates
+
+How to Debate. (n.d.). Retrieved July 10, 2019, from https://www.sfu.ca/cmns/130d1/HOWTODEBATE.htm
+Commission on Presidential Debates. [Resource on U.S. Presidential Debates]. Retrieved from https://www.debates.org/

_modules/delegation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Delegation
+permalink: /modules/delegation/
+summary: Participants allocate their power to a specific representative for a fixed period or a specified role.
+type: process
+---
+
+Delegative democracy allows voters to assign their voting power to others, generally on a per-issue basis and subject to immediate recall. Voters generally have the option of voting on a given question directly but can choose a proxy whom they deem trustworthy. That proxy may choose a proxy in turn.
+
+Delegation has more recently, and [sometimes controversially](https://uniteddiversity.coop/2013/07/19/liquid-democracy-is-not-delegative-democracy/), been referred to as "liquid democracy." It occupies a middle space between systems of [representation](representation.md) and [referendum](referendum.md)-based direct democracy.
+
+**Input:** Choice between referrendum voting and assigning a proxy, issue types
+
+**Output:** Referendum participants with varying proxy power on each given issue type
+
+## Background
+
+[Bryan Ford](http://bford.info/2014/11/16/deleg.html):
+
+> Perhaps unsurprisingly, I was only one of many people to think along these lines over the decades. In Lewis Carrol’s Principles of Parliamentary Representation of 1884, candidates could “club” their votes together, allowing a candidate who received more votes than required to win a seat to delegate the “excess” votes toward the election of other candidates. James C. Miller in 1969 foresaw electronic voting and proposed a delegate proxy voting scheme, to enable more widespread——and more propoportional——representation in political decisions.
+> 
+> Starting around 2002 the Internet exploded with reinventions of this and similar ideas. Besides my Delegative Democracy proposal, there was Dennis Lomax’s Beyond Politics, Jio Ito’s Emergent Democracy, Sayke’s Liquid Democracy and voting system, Mikael Nordfors’ Democracy 2.1, James Green-Armytage’s delegable proxy system, and Mark Rosst’s Structural Deep Democracy. The idea of allowing voters to delegate their participation to individually-chosen representatives is central to all of these proposals, though details differ.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Amplifies voices of popularly recognized experts
+* Disaggregates issues that might otherwise be bound together by party alliances
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Popularity may accord to proxies for reasons other than genuine expertise
+* Lack of stability in proxy power might unsettle deliberative processes
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* [Flux](https://voteflux.org/) - Australian political party
+* [Partido de la Red](http://partidodelared.org/) - Buenos Aires political party
+* Pirate Parties in many countries have used delegation to decide on policies
+* United States electoral candidates
+    - [Michael Allman](https://allmanforcongress.com/) (US House, California)
+    - [Camilo Casas](https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/59dnbb/colorado-political-candidate-promises-to-give-his-seat-to-an-app) (city council, Boulder, CO)
+    - [David Ernst](https://www.liquiddavid.com/) (US House, California)
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Democracy.Earth](https://democracy.earth) - Provides a blockchain-based liquid democracy system, from the creators of DemocracyOS
+* [DemocracyOS](http://democracyos.org/)
+* [LiquidFeedback](https://liquidfeedback.org/)
+* [Liquid US](https://liquid.us/)
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Ford, Bryan. "[Delegative Democracy Revisited](http://bford.info/2014/11/16/deleg.html)." November 16, 2014.
+* Hardt, Steve and Lia C. R. Lopes. “[Google Votes: A Liquid Democracy Experiment on a Corporate Social Network](http://www.tdcommons.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1092&context=dpubs_series).” Technical Disclosure Commons, 2015.
+* Sayke. "[Liquid Democracy In Context or, An Infrastructuralist Manifesto](https://web.archive.org/web/20160403043216/https://seed.sourceforge.net/ld_k5_article_004.html)." Retrieved April 3, 2016.

_modules/disapproval_voting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Disapproval voting
+permalink: /modules/disapproval_voting/
+summary: Votes are cast for the options voters do not want, and the option with the fewest votes wins.
+type: decision
+---
+
+or, Negative voting

_modules/do-ocracy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Do-ocracy
+permalink: /modules/do-ocracy/
+summary: Those who step forward to do a given task can decide how it should be done.
+type: decision
+---
+
+Do-ocracy is a methodology by which those who take initiative to do work in a group are empowered to make decisions about what they do. It tends to appear most often in informal organizations characterized by high levels of mutual trust and a dependence on contributions by highly motivated volunteers.
+
+**Input:** self-directed individuals or subgroups, tacit permission from larger group
+
+**Output:** self-directed outcomes
+
+## Background
+
+A portmanteau of the verb "to do" and the suffix "-ocracy," the word *do-ocracy* first appears [in Word Spy](https://wordspy.com/index.php?word=do-ocracy) in 2004. It appears again in 2012, in reference to a co-working space and the hacker phenomenon Anonymous. The radio program _A Way with Words_ [attributes](https://www.waywordradio.org/do-ocracy/) the popularization of the word with the 2011 Occupy movement.
+
+[According to CommunityWiki](https://communitywiki.org/wiki/DoOcracy), "The term is popular with libertarian management afficionados and BurningMan participants." The wiki for the San Francisco hackerspace Noisebridge refers to it as "a decentralized, anarchist way of deciding and managing how things get changed" and offers this summary: "If you want something done, do it, but remember to be excellent to each other when doing so."
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Participant initative and sense of ownership
+* Eliminates cost of formal governance practices in high-trust contexts
+* Authority closest to the question at hand
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Unintended conflicts when participants act against the will of others
+* Empowerment those with the most free time with the most authority
+* Burnout when responsibilities aren't adequately shared
+* Lack of coordination and coherence in group efforts
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Edgeryders, a European social innovation network, [has as a motto](https://www.thenation.com/article/can-monasteries-be-model-reclaiming-tech-culture-good/), "Who does the work calls the shots"
+* [Ouishare](https://www.ouishare.net/our-dna), a collaborative economy network, holds do-ocracy as one of its core "values"
+    - Alícia Trepat Pont, "[A doocracy-based decision-making mechanism](https://communitiesforimpact.org/case_study/governance-to-empower-an-emergent-community/)," case study, Virtual Communities for Impact
+
+### Tools
+
+Do-ocracy practices can be facilitated by common collaboration tools like Git issue systems and wekan boards
+
+## Further resources
+
+* [DoOcracy entry at CommunityWiki](https://communitywiki.org/wiki/DoOcracy)
+* [Lazy consensus](lazy_consensus.md) blends do-ocracy with [consensus process](consensus_process.md)

_modules/eloquence.md

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Eloquence
+permalink: /modules/eloquence/
+summary: An opportunity to persuade others with rhetorical effect.
+type: culture
+---
+
+Eloquence is a graceful and artistic form of expression, associated strongly with oratory and public speaking. Unlike rhetoric, it does not aim to argue for a specific view based upon the three modes of persuasion—though an argumentative speech may indeed be eloquent, it is not fundamental to its meaning. Eloquence is described as the force of a certain delivery based on the manner of speaking or writing employed by the orator or author; it flows seamless and demonstrates a command of language.
+
+**Input:** comfort with language and communication; platform for speaking and writing; an intended audience
+
+**Output:** speech or piece of writing with appeal through the artistry of the chosen language and emotion it provokes
+
+## Background
+
+Notions of eloquence date back to ancient times. In Greek mythology, Calliope is a beautiful-voice muse of eloquence and epic poetry tutored by Apollo. 
+Cicero, a Roman statesman widely considered one of the greatest speakers of all time, writes about the necessity for style, flow, and conveying emotions in his dialogue “De Oratore” (55 BC). He finds eloquence one of the most powerful aspects of oratory, separate from the argumentative goals of rhetoric. Petrarch, a poet of the Italian Renaissance, taught eloquence as the ultimate goal in mastering language and communication.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Eloquence is connoted with politeness and morality, something that further separates it from rhetoric, which is often framed as unethical and manipulative
+* Provides the vehicle through which to deliver important logical and convincing content
+* Builds credibility for the speaker or author; aims to positively impact audience
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Eloquence can divert audiences from content and mask it in appealing yet superficial language
+* Can discourage audiences from thinking critically about important issues, as eloquent language may leave no room for contention 
+* The entirety of an individual’s qualifications may be undermined and render them poorly suited for the job in the eyes of the audience if they lack eloquence, despite their ability and aptitude in practice.
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Eloquence is frequently associated with elections and political speeches. Known for their eloquence is a host of figures, political and otherwise, from Roman General Mark Antony to Martin Luther King Jr., from Barack Obama to Winston Churchill, from Margaret Thatcher to Oprah Winfrey.
+
+### Tools
+
+* [“The Art of Public Speaking”]( https://www.learnoutloud.com/Free-Audio-Video/Self-Development/Public-Speaking/The-Art-of-Public-Speaking/47818) by Dale Carnegie, available in audiobook
+* Ginger Public Speaking offers [free and low-cost courses]( https://www.gingerpublicspeaking.com/courses/free-online-courses-classes) in public speaking
+* [The Public Speaking Project]( http://www.publicspeakingproject.org/) offers online tools in print and module format
+
+## Further resources
+
+O’Connell, D. C., & Kowal, S. (2002). Political eloquence. In The social psychology of politics (pp. 89-103). Springer, Boston, MA.
+
+Donoghue, D. (2008). On Eloquence. Yale University Press.
+
+Elbow, P. (2011;2012;). Vernacular eloquence: What speech can bring to writing. New York;Oxford;: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199782505.001.0001
+
+Gildenhard, I. (2011). Creative eloquence: The construction of reality in Cicero's speeches. Oxford: Oxford University Press

_modules/exclusion.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Exclusion
+permalink: /modules/exclusion/
+summary: A participant may be removed from, or prevented from entering, the group or a process.
+type: process
+---

_modules/executive.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Executive
+permalink: /modules/executive/
+summary: A specific entity implements policy for the community.
+type: structure
+---

_modules/fact_finding.md

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Fact-finding
+permalink: /modules/fact-finding/
+summary: An investigation into the facts of a matter.
+type: process
+---
+
+Fact finding is a procedure that takes place in a variety of settings, primarily disputes, to investigate the true information about a given situation. Fact finding can occur in numerous ways, from interviewing potential participants to reviewing relevant documents. 
+
+**Input:** An individual or team of individuals who are objective and impartial to the situation under review; a set procedure for fact finding; resources for investigation (i.e., interview questions)
+
+**Output:** A collection of information designed to inform the parties engaged in a dispute
+
+## Background
+
+The term “fact finding” is relatively young, with its first recorded use occurring in the early 1900s. The Hague Convention of 1907 was the first time when official procedural measures were established for fact finding, specifically in the context of disputes between two states. Though it has evolved greatly to its current state, this version of the procedure served as a crucial model for later iterations.
+
+In 1992, United Nations created an [updated list]( http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/monitoring/chapter18.html) of model procedures for fact finding in situations involving potential human rights violations based upon their 1970 Draft Model Rules.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Joint fact finding can allow opposing sides an opportunity to work together despite their dispute
+* Establishing facts can allow the dispute to become more stable and realistic
+* In searching for facts, more information than the fact finder originally sought can be brought to light and provide more clarity to the situation
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Factual inquiries can easily be blended with values concerns, compromising impartiality and subjectivity
+* Facts may not be the core of the issue at hand; interpretation of facts, relevance of facts, and how the facts fit into the larger dispute are largely subjective and may complicate the presence of bare facts
+* Factual information may be difficult to find and, if found, may be complex and difficult to apply neutrally to the dispute
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Fact finding groups exist on both a national and an [international scale]( https://www.ihffc.org/index.asp?Language=EN&page=home). Numerous [government agencies]( https://www.eeoc.gov/federal/adr/factfinding.cfm) have fact finding commissions, including the Department of the Air Force, Department of Treasury, and the National Security Agency. In workplace disputes, human resources departments are generally assigned the responsibility of fact finding.
+
+### Tools
+
+* CPHR Alberta offers a step-by-step [guide]( https://www.cphrab.ca/report-writing-hr-professionals-conducting-workplace-investigations) to fact-finding in workplace scenarios
+* Queens University IRC provides [six golden rules]( https://irc.queensu.ca/articles/golden-rules-fact-finding-six-steps-developing-fact-finding-plan) of fact-finding
+* The International Bar Association shares the [International Human Rights Fact-Finding Guidelines]( https://www.ibanet.org/Fact_Finding_Guidelines.aspx) for download
+
+## Further resources
+
+Schultz, N. (2004, updated 2018). ["Fact-Finding."]( https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/fact-finding/#narrow-body) Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder.
+
+Ramcharan, B. G. (1983). International law and fact-finding in the field of human rights. The Hague;Hingham, MA, USA;Boston;: M. Nijhoff Publishers.
+
+[“What is Fact-Finding? Definition and Examples.”]( https://marketbusinessnews.com/financial-glossary/fact-finding/) Market Business News.
+
+[Declaration on Fact-finding by the United Nations in the Field of the Maintenance of International Peace and Security](https://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/46/a46r059.htm). (1991). United Nations.

_modules/federation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Federation
+permalink: /modules/federation/
+summary: A central authority delegates power to, and is co-governed by, subsidiary authorities.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Federation is the principle of connecting smaller, partially self-governing units through a central unit that manages shared resources among them and powers over them. It generally seeks to create a multi-layer architecture in which authority lies at the most appropriate level.
+
+Federal*ism* is generally associated with calls for a stronger central authority.
+
+Federation and confederation are sometimes distinguished, wherein federation is a system where sovereignty lies chiefly in the central unit (such as the US federal government), while in a confederation sovereignty is understood to lie with the constiuent units (such as the European Union).
+
+**Input:** constituent units, central unit, contracts among them
+
+**Output:** cohesion, multi-layered authority structure
+
+## Background
+
+Federated structures have been widespread in various forms of government, as well as in private enterprise. Early examples include the pre-Columbian Haudenosaunee Confederation (or Iroquois Confederacy), followed by post-colonial formations in the Americas such as the United States, Mexico, and Brazil.
+
+In the private sector, cooperative businesses frequently form federations, which are typically second-order co-ops (or nonprofit associations) whose constiuent members are smaller cooperatives or non-cooperative businesses.
+
+Federation may be considered an implementation of the philosophical concept of subsidarity, which holds that power should reside as locally as possible to the relevant context.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Balance between local governance and economies of scale
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Can exact high costs of governance among autonomous constituent units
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Cooperative federations, such as Confcooperative in Italy and US "generation and transmission" electric cooperatives
+* Governments in many countries
+
+In fiction:
+
+* [United Federation of Planets](https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/United_Federation_of_Planets) in the Star Trek franchise
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Fediverse](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fediverse), a set of interoperable federated social networks using software such as Mastodon, GNU Social, and Pleroma
+* [Lightning Network](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Network), a scalability solution for blockchain systems that dynamically delegates authority to clusters of trusting nodes
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Ilten, Carla. "[Finding “meso-level” community at SASE 2017](https://organizationaldynamics.wordpress.com/2018/01/10/finding-meso-level-community-at-sase-2017/). 
+Center on Organizational Dynamics. January 10, 2018.

_modules/friendship.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Friendship
+permalink: /modules/friendship/
+summary: Relationships among participants facilitate or inhibit governance processes.
+type: culture
+---
+
+Friendship is an association based on mutual affection, respect, and equality. Specific elements at play may vary, but in general, friendship is built upon a foundation of positive feelings between two parties. In most cases, friendship develops due to common interests, values, and beliefs. 
+
+**Input:** shared respect and notions of equality
+
+**Output:** mutually beneficial, horizontal relationship between parties
+
+## Background
+
+Differing ideas friendship date back to classic thinkers like Cicero and Aristotle. For Cicero, friendship was a phenomena built on virtue – it was an opportunity for individuals to find another self, to feel rewarded from the friendship and kinship itself. Cicero’s dialogue “De Amicitia,” or “How to be a Friend,” describes in depth his views on friendship. 
+
+For Aristotle, however, varying types of friendship with differing rewards exist. His first two types of friendship are not intentional. One exists for the utility it provides for the parties while the other exists for the pleasure it provides. Both of these are superficial and short-lasting. The most intentional and enduring type of friendship he defines is based on mutual appreciation for values, beliefs, and opinions – appreciating the other person’s character is what allows this type of friendship to last and to grow.
+
+In a democratic sense, civic or political friendship is valuable for governance and for the state; for Aristotle, citizens should strive for the common good of the state, working towards a common goal and helping one another. In a situation rich with political friendship, revolution and turmoil are kept at bay because citizens strive to live well together.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* On a basic level, friendship has individuals benefits for [overall health and happiness]( https://www.mindwise.org/blog/mental-health/how-friendship-affects-your-physical-mental-health/)
+* Civic friendship leads to an authentic view of others as equals, leading to an increased willingness to participate in practices that encourage equality on an institutional level 
+* Friendship between states and countries can reduce international strife and increase respect for cultural difference
+* Civic friendship can create a robust community of individuals taking civic action
+
+### Oversights
+
+* In any governance setting, including places of work, true equality and a genuine desire to work toward a common good can be difficult to achieve given the hierarchical structure of many companies
+* A modern, Western focus on individualism and selfhood diverts focus from interactions with others for a wider goal and encourages Aristotle’s first two forms of friendship
+* Classical notions of civic friends exclude marginalized groups such as people of color and women; truly equitable relationships are difficult to form in an unjust society
+* Friendship can foster a utilitarian, or “best action for best number of people” approach rather than addressing complexities of the political system
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Civic friendship can manifest in [civic engagement]( https://www.everyday-democracy.org/news/civic-engagement-three-examples-where-citizens-had-say), such as an effort to stop gerrymandering in California taken on by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission or the Strong Starts for Children program formed in New Mexico. 
+
+### Tools
+
+* The Dole Institute offers a [list of tools for civic engagement]( http://doleinstitute.org/get-involved/civic-engagement-tools/) – a concrete manifestation of civic friendship.
+* The U.S. Department of Education’s [Sustaining Grassroots Community-Based Programs: A Toolkit for Community- and Faith-Based Service Providers](https://sites.ed.gov/aapi/files/2014/03/SAMHSA-Toolkit.pdf).
+* To build community and friendships within and around your organization, John Snow, Inc.’s [Engaging your Community: A Toolkit for Partnership, Collaboration, and Action](https://www.jsi.com/JSIInternet/Inc/Common/_download_pub.cfm?id=14333&lid=3) is available for download.
+
+## Further resources
+
+Shukla, R. (2014). [Justice and Civic Friendship: An Aristotelian Critique of Modern Citizenry]( http://www.jstor.org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/stable/43281396). Frontiers of Philosophy in China,9(1), 1-20.
+
+Mayhew, R. (1996). [Aristotle on Civic Friendship]( https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5763/169fafa5dc4dc917a59e4fa71162b64358aa.pdf). The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter, 197. 
+
+Schwarzenbach, S. A. (2005). Democracy and friendship. Journal of Social Philosophy, 36(2), 233-254. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9833.2005.00269.x

_modules/index.html

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Modules
+url: /modules/
+---
+
+
+    {% assign modules_array = site.modules | sort: "type" | reverse %}
+    {% for module in modules_array %}
+        <span class="module" id="module-{{ module.title | slugify }}"
+    draggable="true" ondragstart="drag(event)">
+<span id="module-title" title="{{ module.summary }}">
+            {{ module.title }}</span>
+          <a target="_blank" href="{{ module.url }}">
+            <img title="{{ module.type }} (press for info)" draggable="false" class="module-logo"
+                 {% if module.type == "structure" %}
+                 src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/building.svg %}" {% endif %}
+                 {% if module.type == "process" %}
+                 src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/rotate.svg %}" {% endif %}
+                 {% if module.type == "decision" %}
+                 src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/thumb-up.svg %}" {% endif %}
+                 {% if module.type == "culture" %}
+                 src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/palette.svg %}" {% endif %}
+                 /></a>
+		  <a onclick="this.parentNode.remove()" class="delete-module"
+			 style="display:none">
+			<img src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/x.svg %}" /></a>
+		</span>
+        {% endfor %}

_modules/judiciary.md

@@ -0,0 +1,55 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Judiciary
+permalink: /modules/judiciary/
+summary: Courts or other oversight mechanisms ensure that policies are being properly implemented.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Judiciary refers to the system of courts a government system might include as an enactment of the separation of powers. As an interpreter of the law, the judiciary branch protects human rights and applies or disputes particular legislation to specific cases. Though it does not create or pass laws, it enacts them and may determine their scope or practical application.
+
+**Input:** democratic government with separate branches of power; established court system operating at various levels
+
+**Output:** opportunity for individuals to seek justice for wrongdoings; enforcement of laws; protection of constitutions
+
+## Background
+
+In ancient Rome, the judicial process was the first occurrence of legal proceedings in which the head judiciary member would review a case followed by a jury of sorts, comprised of Roman citizens who had little experience in law but were directed towards laws to apply and interpret for given cases. An Anglo-Saxon history notes the struggle between judges and monarchs from approximately 1000 A.D. – judges were initially previous advisors of the King – for independence. Bribery and corruption were rampant issues in these systems; the current judiciary system for this region was not developed until the 1960s.
+
+In the United States, the judiciary branch began developing with the Judiciary Act of 1789, giving shape to Supreme Court regulations and federal district courts throughout the states.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+* Provides a system of checks and balances for other branches of government; checks constitutionality of other branches’ decisions and laws
+* Can uphold human rights through interpretation of law
+* Allows individual attention and consideration to be paid to unique and complex cases
+* If a court rules in a way that is perceived unjust, the decision can be appealed to a higher court for reconsideration
+* Lifetime judiciary roles can prevent judges from acting on third-party or private interests for reelection purposes
+
+### Oversights
+* Selection of judges in some systems can contradict separation of powers, such as election through legislature or executive appointment
+* Lifetime judiciary roles can lead to entrenchment and party-based rulings
+* Ideological rulings and self-interest of judges can compromise neutral application of the law
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Nearly all governments around the world include judiciaries of some form, such as China’s National People’s Congress, France’s Council of State and Court of Cassation, and Australia’s High Court.
+* Blockchain-based distributed ledger systems [sometimes use mechanisms called oracles](https://cointelegraph.com/explained/blockchain-oracles-explained) that introduce human intervention to interpret context in order to decide whether or how to trigger a smart contract.
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Aragon Court](https://blog.aragon.org/aragon-court-is-live-on-mainnet/), "a dispute resolution protocol formed by jurors to handle subjective disputes that cannot be resolved by smart contracts"
+* [Crowdjury]( https://medium.com/the-crowdjury/the-crowdjury-a-crowdsourced-court-system-for-the-collaboration-era-66da002750d8) is a hypothetical blockchain system for justice in the internet age.
+* Software for court case management exists in a variety of places online, such as [eCourt](https://www.capterra.com/p/83916/eCourt/).
+* [Voltaire](https://voltaireapp.com/) provides a hub for jury research.
+
+
+## Further resources
+* Berger, R. (1977). Government by judiciary (pp. 363-72). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
+* Crowe, J. (2012). Building the judiciary : Law, courts, and the politics of institutional development. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com
+* [Judiciary](https://link-gale-com.colorado.idm.oclc.org/apps/doc/CX1337702473/OVIC?u=coloboulder&sid=OVIC&xid=8a841947). (2011). In D. Batten (Ed.), Gale Encyclopedia of American Law (3rd ed., Vol. 6, pp. 74-79). Detroit, MI: Gale.
+* Ruggiu, I. (2018). [Culture and the judiciary : The anthropologist judge](https://ebookcentral.proquest.com).
+

_modules/lazy_consensus.md

@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Lazy consensus
+permalink: /modules/lazy_consensus/
+summary: Proposals are presumed to pass in the absence of objections.
+type: decision
+---
+
+Lazy consensus is a method for decision-making according to which proposals within a group may be presumed to pass unless any explicit objections arise. It blends features of [do-ocracy](do-ocracy.md) and [consensus process](consensus_process.md). The Apache Software Foundation, which holds lazy consensus as a value, [summarizes](https://community.apache.org/committers/lazyConsensus.html) the method as "silence is consent."
+
+**Input:** proposal within group, presumption of approval
+
+**Output:** approval by silence or objection that triggers further deliberation
+
+## Background
+
+Lazy consensus is most widely employed among free/open-source software projects.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Empowers participants to take initiative and rewards commitment with authority
+* Lowers cost of governance
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Privileges voices of participants with more time and attention due to external inequalities
+* Insuffient participation can lead to insufficient decision-making oversight
+* Ambiguity arising from community silence (cf. "[Warnock's dilemma](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma)")
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* [Apache Software Foundation](https://community.apache.org/committers/lazyConsensus.html)
+
+### Tools
+
+Free/open-source projects that employ lazy consensus often rely on email discussion lists for decision-making. The method helps reduce the traffic on such lists.
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Nowviskie, Bethany. March 10, 2012. "[Lazy Consensus](http://nowviskie.org/2012/lazy-consensus/)." Based on #code4lib conference keynote.

_modules/legislature.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Legislature
+permalink: /modules/legislature/
+summary: A specific entity sets policy for the community.
+type: structure
+---

_modules/lobbying.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Lobbying
+permalink: /modules/lobbying/
+summary: People outside decision-making obtain ways to influence decision makers.
+type: process
+---
+
+Lobbying refers to the practice of attempting to persuade or change the minds of officials in governance systems. It is associated with face-to-face contact and relationship-building between lobbyists and policymakers.
+
+**Input:** Individuals willing to represent and/or advocate for a certain cause or issue with the intent of influencing those in decision-making positions, usually with in-depth understanding of federal processes and government
+
+**Output:** Politicians, lawmakers, or decision-makers are left with information intended to persuade them to enact change to existing policy, create new policy, or block new policy
+
+## Background
+
+The word “lobbying” dates back to the 1640s, when lobbies of British parliament were sites of intense political debate and persuasion before and after sessions. An alternate history ascribes the word to the individuals who gathered in the lobby of the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C. to gain access to Ulysses S. Grant, a regular there, for political favors.
+
+In 1938, the Foreign Agents Restriction Act sought to control and track international lobbying in the U.S. It was quickly followed in 1945 when the first legislation was passed that required domestic lobbyists to register and submit reports on their activity. In 1995, the [Lobbying Disclosure Act]( https://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov/amended_lda_guide.html) defined the legality of lobbying and the necessary practices associated with it in order to regulate it. 
+
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Lobbyists provide representation for citizens who may not have the time and resources to represent themselves in contesting important issues
+* Allows for constant communication and visibility of issues that could easily be overshadowed by others
+*Encourages participation in democracy
+* The nature of lobbying as focusing on a singular issue allows for in-depth research and fact-checking by lobbyists
+* Lobbyists have the opportunity to develop relationships with elected officials and achieve more impact
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Though intended to work on the behalf of a broadly conceived swath of citizens, lobbying for special interest groups can perpetuate the needs of a small group with certain privileges or work against the needs of the majority
+* The financial aspect of lobbying influences what issues are represented, funded, and what action is taken; [wealthy interests generally control the lobbying sphere]( https://www.huffpost.com/entry/americas-lobbying-system-is-broken_b_5938a0cfe4b014ae8c69dd90?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAALn3rCa6p-rX9Vibap7AJX8PfH_b-Gcvgwyn4n8CXc1z0azuGRnmLV28SluFbzjQYubxz5WlXS3tVttP6DnJmCwh5HnQp2czC0-8xIcmDF6Pz3HSJprTDBMxfyyHYi-kzadKXX14gIAGbL26HreILkHdc0OScCpD2aVcmWvt8cJ0)
+* Bribery and unethical funding of Congress members can result in complex and negative power relationships that result in undue influence 
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Lobbyists exist for a plethora of issues, from health care to taxation to gun laws. 
+
+In Australia, the [Women’s Electoral Lobby]( http://welvic.org.au/) represents a variety of women’s health issues. The [Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers]( https://www.capp.ca/) represents natural gas and upstream oil issues. Lobbying in the EU is transnational and addresses a diversity of issues as well, from climate change to trade regulations.
+
+
+### Tools
+
+* [The Friends Committee on National Legislation]( https://www.fcnl.org/updates/how-to-meet-with-congress-19) provides advocacy resources
+* The New Liberty Coalition created a [toolkit]( https://b.3cdn.net/noicamp4/695a1e24d0982ccb17_h3m62wee3.pdf) for lobbying for the DREAM Act – it serves as an in-depth example guide.
+* Move to Amend provides a [guide]( https://movetoamend.org/sites/default/files/MTA-LobbyingGuide.pdf) to lobbying on state and national levels
+
+## Further resources
+
+“What is a Lobbyist?” (2018). [LobbyIt]( https://lobbyit.com/what-is-a-lobbyist/).
+
+Heiligenstein, M. (2019). [What Is Lobbying?]( https://fitsmallbusiness.com/what-is-lobbying/).
+
+Whiteley, P. F., & Winyard, S. J. (2018). Pressure for the poor: the poverty lobby and policy making. Routledge.
+
+Brulle, R. J. (2018). The climate lobby: a sectoral analysis of lobbying spending on climate change in the USA, 2000 to 2016. Climatic change, 149(3-4), 289-303.
+
+
+<!---cf. canvassing-->

_modules/lottery_voting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Lottery Voting
+permalink: /modules/lottery_voting/
+summary: Decision makers are chosen at random from among the community.
+type: process
+---
+
+Lottery voting is a system that strives to elect a legislature that accurately represents a community. Each citizen casts a ballot and one from each district is randomly drawn from the pool.
+
+**Input:** voting populace; equally divided districts; equal-value ballots from each voter; candidate tickets
+
+**Output:** an elected population based on probability
+
+## Background
+
+Lottery voting was conceived by Akhil Reed Amar in a 1984 Yale Law Journal article. He followed this with a 1995 piece that classifies the system as a thought experiment and a way to better understand the pros and cons of current voting systems and their democratic mechanisms.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Lottery voting has the potential to more fairly represent minority groups; a candidate with only 20% of the votes still has a 20% chance of being chosen randomly
+* Every candidate has a feasible chance of winning, which [can lead to greater voter turnout]( https://cedar.wwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1042&context=wwu_honors)
+* It can prevent strategic voting in which an individual votes for someone they don’t support as strongly to prevent another candidate from winning
+* Gerrymandering would not be effective nor useful in this system; voting districts would be equal in population and therefore ballots would be equal in representation 
+* Challenges elected officials staying in office for exorbitant amounts of time, as there is a higher chance that a new candidate will be elected; Amar defines this as a type of built-in term limit
+
+### Oversights
+
+* This system is only effective on a large scale with multiple representatives
+* The chance of an undesirable candidate getting chosen from the pool is still present
+* It can decrease the voting populace’s feelings of political efficacy, or having a direct impact on the outcome
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Because of its original conception as a thought experiment, lottery voting is not currently implemented in any large-scale democracies.
+
+### Tools
+
+* Probability tools can be found [online]( https://www.interactive-maths.com/probability-tools-flash.html) and in a variety of [phone applications]( https://apps.apple.com/us/app/probability-tools/id544340525).
+
+
+## Further resources
+
+Amar, A. R. (1995). Lottery Voting: A Thought Experiment. In University of Chicago Legal Forum (Vol. 1995, No. 1, p. 8).
+
+Amar, A. (1984). Choosing Representatives by Lottery Voting. The Yale Law Journal, 93(7), 1283-1308. doi:10.2307/796258
+
+GUERRERO, A. A. (2014). Against elections: The lottocratic alternative. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 42(2), 135-178. doi:10.1111/papa.12029

_modules/majority_voting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Majority Voting
+permalink: /modules/majority_voting/
+summary: The option that receives more than half the vote wins; it none wins, a runoff occurs.
+type: decision
+---
+
+Majority voting is an electoral system requiring a candidate to receive more than half of the votes cast to win and results in one single winner. Though associated with plurality voting, as they are both proportional representative systems, majority voting does not select a winner based on the most votes but on the candidate who receives more than fifty percent of the votes. If no one candidate receives half of the votes, either a runoff election is held between the two candidates with the most votes or an alternative vote or “majority preferential” system is used.
+
+**Input:** a position up for election; eligible voters; a specific candidate that receives at least half of the votes cast
+
+**Output:** a single victor who represents the will of the most voters
+
+## Background
+
+Majority voting has roots in the democracy of Ancient Greece when decisions were made by a popular assembly of eligible male voters. Limits existed on majority voting practices, however, to ensure the fair distribution of power among classes and interests through simultaneously giving proportionate representation to minority groups.
+
+The ideology of majority voting systems was later adopted by thinkers such as John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, for whom it represented equality and fairness due to equal valuation of individual votes. 
+
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* A majority rule is said to embody democratic ideals by representing the will of the most people
+* This system can lead to more middle-ground solutions, as it often represents the will of the median voter
+* It likely produces a stable government
+* It is apt to protect against oppressive governments
+
+### Oversights
+
+* These systems can fail to give minority groups any voice or proportional platform; it has been criticized as [“tyranny of the majority”]( https://www.annenbergclassroom.org/glossary_term/majority-rule-and-minority-rights/)
+* Minority parties have little chance at winning an election
+* This system can be manipulated by gerrymandering and border adjustment
+* Voters may choose a candidate who does not fully represent their beliefs, but whom they believe may have a better chance of winning as to not “waste” their vote
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Democracies across the world utilize majority voting in some way, including Finland, Austria, France and Portugal. In the United States, a presidential candidate must have a majority of Electoral College votes to be elected. 
+
+This system is implemented in [many corporate governance systems]( https://www.covfinancialservices.com/2016/11/2017-proxy-season-preview-renewed-shareholder-push-for-majority-voting-in-director-elections-may-affect-more-small-and-middle-market-banks/), such as the [Council of Institutional Investors’ directorial elections]( https://www.cii.org/majority_voting_directors).
+
+### Tools
+
+* Algorithms such as the [Boyer—Moore majority vote algorithm]( https://algorithms.tutorialhorizon.com/majority-element-boyer-moore-majority-vote-algorithm/) or the [MJRTY majority vote algorithm]( https://medium.com/stephen-rambles/an-efficient-majority-vote-algorithm-3005722180d4) help determine if a majority exists in a list of votes.
+* A variety of simple poll tools exist online to facilitate majority voting. Social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram offer poll features while other websites such as Doodle Poll, EasyPolls, and Google offer tools for voting.
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Volk, K. G. (2014). Moral minorities and the making of American democracy. Oxford University Press.
+* Tullock, G. (1959). Problems of majority voting. Journal of political economy, 67(6), 571-579.
+* Rubinstein, A. (1980). Stability of decision systems under majority rule. Journal of Economic Theory, 23(2), 150-159.
+* Boyer, R. S., & Moore, J. S. (1991). MJRTY—a fast majority vote algorithm. In Automated Reasoning (pp. 105-117). Springer, Dordrecht.

_modules/membership.md

@@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Membership
+permalink: /modules/membership/
+summary: Clear lines distinguish those who are members of the group from those who are not.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Membership is a means by which an organization or government determines its core constituency---and excludes non-members. Members enjoy some specific set of rights of governance and benefit that non-members do not enjoy. In state contexts, it is generally referred to as citizenship. In corporate contexts, it may correlate with stock [ownership](ownership.md). Systems of membership typically presume some means of identity management.
+
+**Input:** identity management, set of membership rights and benefits
+
+**Output:** enjoyment of rights and benefits by members
+
+## Background
+
+<!-- brief historical reference points -->
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+<!-- what does this medium capture especially well? -->
+
+### Oversights
+
+<!-- what does this medium overlook? -->
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+<!-- what are some real-world examples in practice? -->
+
+### Tools
+
+<!-- what software, methodologies, or organizations are available to facilitate implementation -->
+
+## Further resources
+
+<!-- where should people look first if they want to learn more? -->

_modules/meritocracy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Meritocracy
+permalink: /modules/meritocracy/
+summary: Participants gain authority according to their excellence by shared standards.
+type: process
+---

_modules/multicameralism.md

@@ -0,0 +1,56 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Multicameralism
+permalink: /modules/multicameralism/
+summary: Within a particular role in governance, there are two distinct entities that must independently agree on a decision for it to pass.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Multicameralism refers to the organization of a legislature into separate, distinct bodies. It is an enactment of the separation of powers; it divides decision-making among different chambers or houses. The assembly can be divided into as many assemblies as necessary – some have two branches while others may have four or even five.
+
+
+**Input:** distinct legislative bodies with sovereignty over different aspects of governmental decision-making
+
+**Output:** a system of chambers that divides power among two or more groups
+
+## Background
+
+Some of the oldest examples of multicameral legislatures can be found in various European parliaments. The oldest surviving parliament is the British Parliament, established in Anglo-Saxon times, which had law-making and law-enforcement councils that eventually evolved into the bicameral legislature the Parliament implements today.
+
+A tricameral legislature is traditionally associated with Simon Bolivar’s theory in “which a popularly elected chamber, (the Chamber of Tribunes) would be endowed with the power to regulate finance and foreign affairs, a hereditary chamber (the Senate) would enact law, and a third chamber (the Censors) would have the power to review the lawfulness of the acts of the other two and to protect fundamental rights.” ([Passaglia, 2018](https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/pof.2018.10.issue-2/pof-2018-0014/pof-2018-0014.pdf)). This theory, though, remains as such – parliamentary governments were never popularized in the Americas.
+
+Apartheid-era South African government instituted a tricameral system with race-based houses, abolished in 1994. A tetracameral legislature was implemented in Finland until 1906. Most European parliaments presently employ a unicameral or bicameral system.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Provides checks and balances for legislation, preventing abuse of power and dictatorship
+* Can provide representation for individuals on a more accurate level
+* Can result in laws that are vetted, better-developed, and overall more beneficial to the public
+
+### Oversights
+
+* May not actually represent population it is supposed to serve
+* Can result in deadlock, especially in a bicameral system, and thus waste resources
+* Can be manipulated through means like gerrymandering
+* May dramatically slow lawmaking process
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+The UK’s Parliament and the United States Congress are both bicameral democracies – the US Congress has the Senate and House of Representatives while Parliament has the House of Commons and the House of Lords. 
+
+Other organizational bodies can implement a multicameral legislature as well, such as that [proposed for Canadian healthcare advancement by Carson and Nossal (2016)](https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ucb/reader.action?docID=4851673); collaboration between an operating board of directors and a policy council would form a bicameral governance structure. Some university governance, like that of [Dalhousie University](https://cdn.dal.ca/content/dam/dalhousie/pdf/dept/university_secretariat/Board-of-Governors/Governance%20Structure%20Document%20-%20updated%20August%202016.pdf), is bicameral, as University Administration and Board of Governors are divided in their legislative responsibilities; the [University of Alberta](https://cloudfront.ualberta.ca/-/media/universitygovernance/documents/what-we-do/governance/gov101september-112018.pdf) employs a similar structure.
+
+### Tools
+
+[Principles of Successful Bicameral Governance](https://www.kpu.ca/sites/default/files/downloads/guiding_principles_bicameral_201223724.pdf) from Kwantlen Polytechnic University
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Brauninger, T. (2003). When simple voting doesn't work: Multicameral systems for the representation and aggregation of interests in international organizations. British Journal of Political Science, 33, 681-704. doi:http://dx.doi.org.colorado.idm.oclc.org/10.1017/S0007123403000310
+* Passaglia, P. (2018). Unicameralism, Bicameralism, Multicameralism: Evolution and Trends in Europe. Perspectives on Federalism, 10(2), 1-29.
+* Trakman, L. (2008). Modelling university governance. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(1‐2), 63-83.
+* Tsebelis, G. (1995). Decision making in political systems: Veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism. British journal of political science, 25(3), 289-325.

_modules/ownership.md

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Ownership
+permalink: /modules/ownership/
+summary: An organization is controlled through rights of possession by one or more owners.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Ownership is an umbrella term for a varying series of legal rights over particular entities. In the case of private corporate entities, ownership is a mechanism for claiming and clarifying governance rights.
+
+**Input:** Corporate entity, specified rights of ownership
+
+**Output:** Specified owner involvement in corporate governance
+
+## Background
+
+Modern corporate ownership emerged during the rise of colonial and industrial economies, as a means of managing the complex financial arrangements necessary to capitalize those endeavors.
+
+Lawyers frequently refer to ownership as a "bundle of rights," suggesting that it is not a fixed or stable phenomenon but one that varies based on design and context.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Clarifies in precise legal terms the governance claims of owners
+* Typically organizes influence according to stake in the entity to prevent free-riding
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Does not recognize the voices of important non-owning stakeholders
+* May obscure important externalities, such as social and environmental considerations
+* Inapplicable to non-ownable entities, like nonprofit organizations, information commons, and public-sector resources
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* The [cooperative business tradition](https://www.ica.coop/en/cooperatives/what-is-a-cooperative) tends to employ ownership rights on a one-person-one-vote basis, rather than the one-share-one-vote model of most other corporate practice
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Encode](https://encode.org/) offers "integrations of proven models, legal rules, and methodologies for fully distributing authority and ownership in a purpose-driven business"
+* [Upstock](https://upstock.io/) "creates tools and shares knowledge that aligns founders, investors, and team members" through equity compensation
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Chassagnon, V., & Hollandts, X. (2014). "[Who Are the Owners of the Firm: Shareholders, Employees, or No One?](https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137413000301)" _Journal of Institutional Economics_, 10 (1), 47–69.
+* Hansmann, H. (1996). _The Ownership of Enterprise_.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
+* Kelly, M. (2012). _Owning Our Future: The Emerging Ownership Revolution_. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

_modules/petition.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Petition
+permalink: /modules/petition/
+summary: If a certain number of people sign on to a statement, it triggers the official decision-making process.
+type: process
+---

_modules/platform.md

@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Platform
+permalink: /modules/platform/
+summary: A statement expresses the commitments of a faction contending for authority.
+type: process
+---
+
+
+<!--
+As in, party platforms, clarifying what a party stands for
+
+See also solidarity
+-->

_modules/policy_register.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Policy Register
+permalink: /modules/policy_register/
+summary: A record that documents all currently binding agreements and policies.
+type: process
+---

_modules/polling.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Polling
+permalink: /modules/polling/
+summary: Before decisions are made, a poll gathers opinions in a systematic way.
+type: process
+---
+
+Polling is a democratic medium used to solicit public opinions or attitudes about a particular issue, usually for analysis. The level of formality of polling can range from a generalized questionnaire to accurate, in-depth elections that take place at a polling site. They can serve as indications or predictions of election results, as actual elections, as electoral verification, or as a way to simply gauge preferences and opinions on a variety of matters.
+
+**Input:** vetting opinions of representative groups of people via written or verbal questions
+ 
+**Output:** broad understanding of public opinion
+
+## Background
+
+[PBS](http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/polling.html) cites the first recognition of the importance of public opinion as occurring in the years before the French Revolution by the French Minister of Finance. In the United States, polling is associated with presidential election predictors beginning with the “straw polls” of 1824. Literary Digest was an organization founded in 1890 with a reputation for accurate polling until a 1936 debacle that preceded its merge with two similar publications. The Gallup organization was founded in 1935 and is still functioning today as a pinnacle of polling.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Can offer an accurate and broad representation of public opinion at a relatively low cost
+* Can offer a platform for marginalized voices to share their opinion and views
+* Can provide valuable insights for politicians and corporations to better serve the needs of their populace
+* Can hold people in positions of power accountable through understanding how individuals feel about actions, regulations, and laws
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Reducing the margin of error and therefore ensuring accuracy of a poll requires quite a large sample size
+* Response bias may lead to false results by participants not giving their true opinion
+* Nonresponse bias may lead to false results due to the particular characteristics of those who choose to participate in the poll
+* Polling results covered in mainstream media can influence the opinions of voters based on bandwagon effect
+* The format, wording, and accessibility of polls can influence the responses in manipulative ways
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+As stated above, presidential elections in the United States are a prime site for public polling. Corporations use polls to gauge customer satisfaction and interest; advertisers use polls to see what products and ads work for particular demographics; politicians on any level can use polls to understand how they can better serve the needs of their constituents. 
+[Gallup polls](https://news.gallup.com/poll/101905/gallup-poll.aspx) address economic issues, politics, and even health opinions. [Pew Research Center](https://www.pewresearch.org/topics/polling/) is known for a variety of polling information about a plethora of issues. Almost every major TV network conducts polls on relevant issues as well.
+
+### Tools
+
+* Online poll generators exist on a variety of platforms, from Doodle Poll to Survey Monkey to Google forms
+* [American Research Group, Inc.](https://americanresearchgroup.com/moe.html) offers a margin of error calculator for those conducting polls
+*The [American Association for Public Opinion Research](https://www.aapor.org/Education-Resources/Election-Polling-Resources/Sampling-Methods-for-Political-Polling.aspx) offers online resources for accurate polling
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Killesteyn, E. (2015). Polling officials: The strength and weakness of democratic systems. Election Law Journal, 14(4), 411-423. doi:10.1089/elj.2015.0308
+* Moon, N. (1999). Opinion polls: History, theory and practice. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
+* Smith, T. (1990). The First Straw?: A Study of the Origins of Election Polls. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 54(1), 21-36. 

_modules/power_vacuum.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Power Vacuum
+permalink: /modules/power_vacuum/
+summary: A point of authority at which no structure or role is specified.
+type: structure
+---

_modules/precedent.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Precedent
+permalink: /modules/precedent/
+summary: Previous decisions have bearing on how current decisions should be made.
+type: process
+---
+
+
+<!-- link to judiciary -->
+
+
+<!-- "democracy of the dead" -->

_modules/proof_of_work.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Proof of Work
+permalink: /modules/proof_of_work/
+summary: Power in decision-making is proportionate to a participant's labor for the community.
+type: decision
+---

_modules/proportional_representation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Proportional Representation
+permalink: /modules/proportional_representation/
+summary: Decision makers are chosen in proportion to votes.
+type: process
+---
+
+Proportional representation (PR) refers to the fair and accurate translation of citizen and party makeup into the legislature. If *x* percent of voters support a certain party, then *x* percent of the legislature should mirror that party. Proportional representation voting systems are comprised of three main variations: the party list system, the mixed-member system, and the single transferable vote (or choice voting).
+
+**Input:** multimember districts, voting base, intentional (often low) exclusion threshold 
+
+**Output:** multiparty representation, proportional allocation of seats
+
+## Background
+
+Proportional representation voting systems came about as a reaction to the inaccurate representation of parties that frequently occurred in the plurality and majority voting systems. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, many European countries began to realize the need for increasingly diverse parties to have a fair share of seats as suffrage expanded voter pools. The shift to proportional representation occurred for most European countries by 1920; Western democracies mirrored this trend throughout the 20th century.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Representation for multiple parties, leading to more nuanced policies
+* Representation for marginalized groups
+* Potential for smaller parties to gain representation
+* Research demonstrates higher voter turnout in PR systems
+
+### Oversights
+
+* May produce a fractured legislature of too many parties
+* Can create instability due to lack of majority consensus
+* Parties that form coalitions may become difficult to remove from power
+* Small parties may have disproportional power in tipping a decision between majority parties
+* May create space for extremist parties to gain power
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Many Western democracies use PR systems, including Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Netherlands, Germany, Belgium, and Ireland.
+
+### Tools
+
+* Various formulas exist to calculate the allocated number of seats based on election results, including the D’Hondt Method or Jefferson method, Hare method, and German method
+* The ACE Project provides extensive information on PR systems and the variations of this system with example ballots and formulas
+
+## Further resources
+
+* ACE Project: The Electoral Knowledge Network. "Proportional Representation."
+* Amy, D. J. (2000). _Behind the ballot box: a citizen's guide to voting systems_. Greenwood Publishing Group.
+

_modules/quadratic_voting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Quadratic Voting
+permalink: /modules/quadratic_voting/
+summary: Voters pay to vote, but the cost of voting power increases the more a voter buys.
+type: decision
+---
+
+Quadratic voting (QV) is a decision-making mechanism that allows voters to pay money or other credits to express their priorities. The more credits a voter applies to a given option, the less each credit counts, according to a quadratic decay function.
+
+The QV proposals involve several mechanisms to adjust for the power of wealth concentrations, such as distributing credits equally or redistributing the proceeds of credit contributions for future ballots.
+
+**Input:** ballot of options, weight (e.g., money or pre-assigned credits), quadratic decay function
+
+**Output:** weighted outcome, redistribution of weight credits
+
+## Background
+
+Quadratic voting was first proposed by Steven Lalley and E. Glen Weyl in 2012 and has been developed in several publications since. It has been widely discussed especially among people involved in blockchain protocol design. The concept is patented by Weyl and collaborators through the company Collective Decision Engines. Weyl, through economic analysis, argues that QV has uniquely optimal outcomes when compared to other decision-making systems.
+
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Reflecting degrees of preference
+* Dampening influence of excessive wealth
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Perceived complexity of quadratic algorithm
+* Preferences of less credit-endowed participants, under certain implementations
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Colorado state legislature used it to determine priorities
+    - Press: _[Wired](https://www.wired.com/story/colorado-quadratic-voting-experiment/)_, _[Colorado Sun](https://coloradosun.com/2019/05/28/quadratic-voting-colorado-house-budget/)_
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Democracy Earth](https://democracy.earth) has implemented a quadratic voting tool
+
+## Further resources
+
+*  Lalley, Steven and Weyl, Eric Glen. "[Quadratic Voting: How Mechanism Design Can Radicalize Democracy](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2003531)." _American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings_ 1, no. 1 (2018)
+* Posner, Eric A. and E. Glen Weyl. _Radical Markets: Uprooting Capitalism and Democracy for a Just Society_. Princeton University Press, 2018.
+* Weyl, E. Glen. "[The robustness of quadratic voting](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11127-017-0405-4)." _Public Choice_ 172, no. 1-2 (July 2017)
+* Weyl, W. Glen et al. "[System and Method for Quadratic, Near-Quadratic, and Convex Voting in Various Types of Research and Voting](https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=US&NR=9754272&KC=&FT=E&locale=en_EP#)." US patent US2016292947. October 6, 2016.

_modules/range_voting.md

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Range Voting
+permalink: /modules/range_voting/
+summary: Voters score each option within a range, and the option with the highest average score wins.
+type: decision
+---
+

_modules/ranked_choice.md

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Ranked Choice
+permalink: /modules/ranked_choice/
+summary: Voters rank options, and the option with a majority of top-ranked votes wins; if there is no majority, options with the least top-ranked votes are removed until a majority appears.
+type: decision
+---
+
+
+<!-- or, "instant runoff" -->
+
+<!-- see FairVote -->

_modules/recess.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Recess
+permalink: /modules/recess/
+summary: An official break in governance might calm conflicts and promote accountability to constituents.
+type: process
+---

_modules/referendum.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Referendum
+permalink: /modules/referendum/
+summary: A decision is posed to the community's members at large.
+type: process
+---

_modules/refusal.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Refusal
+permalink: /modules/refusal/
+summary: Participants withdraw participation because of discontent.
+type: process
+---

_modules/representation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Representation
+permalink: /modules/representation/
+summary: Rather than decide directly, people choose representatives to participate in decision making on their behalf.
+type: process
+---

_modules/reputation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Reputation
+permalink: /modules/reputation/
+summary: A system measures and evaluates participants' behavior and weighs their relative rights or credibility accordingly.
+type: process
+---
+
+
+<!-- Chinese citizen score -->
+<!-- social media platforms -->
+<!-- Aragon -->
+<!-- Colony: http://www.erasmuslawreview.nl/tijdschrift/ELR/2019/01/ELR_2018_011_003_005 -->

_modules/restorative_justice.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Restorative Justice
+permalink: /modules/restorative_justice/
+summary: Redress for wrong-doing occurs not through punishment but through repairing the harm done.
+type: process
+---

_modules/rights.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Rights
+permalink: /modules/rights/
+summary: All participants are entitled to certain specified guarantees.
+type: structure
+---

_modules/ritual.md

@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Ritual
+permalink: /modules/ritual/
+summary: A repeated cultural practice builds solidarity and community.
+type: culture
+---
+
+Ritual is a repeated practice that a given culture deems significant, either implicitly or explicitly. It typically has the effect of binding the community that practices it together and of reinforcing certain governance habits.
+
+**Input:** community, culture, artful norm formation
+
+**Output:** self-reinforcing common habits
+
+## History
+
+Ritual is among the "[human universals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Universals)" that anthropologist Donald Brown argues can be found in every human society. It is a phenomenon frequently associated with religion, but it is by no means religion's exclusive purview. Rituals appear widely in childrearing, sports, the arts, and political life.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Establishes and protects norms at lower cost of effort than other enforcement mechanisms, such as [judicial](judiciary.md) sanctions
+* Connects and embeds governance processes organically into broader cultural systems
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Imposes expectations and habits that can be hard to change when change is necessary
+* Can defy rational explanation and thus reduce the rationality of the governance system as a whole
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* [Beating the bounds](https://books.google.com/books?id=2kx7KiTEZCsC&lpg=PA74&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=false), an ancient practice of collectively surveying community boundaries
+* Courtroom practices of respect and costume for judges
+* Inauguration ceremonies for public officials
+
+### Tools
+
+<!-- what software, methodologies, or organizations are available to facilitate implementation -->
+
+## Further resources
+
+* "[Rituals]," Wikimedia Commons
+* Smith, Jonathan Z. _To Take Place: Toward Theory in Ritual_. University of Chicago Press, 1987.

_modules/rough_consensus.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Rough Consensus
+permalink: /modules/rough_consensus/
+summary: Decisions are made not through formal processes but through an informal sense of the group's shared will.
+type: decision
+---

_modules/secrecy.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Secrecy
+permalink: /modules/secrecy/
+summary: Aspects of governance processes are conducted out of public view.
+type: culture
+---

_modules/secret_ballot.md

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Secret Ballot
+permalink: /modules/secret_ballot/
+summary: A vote, once cast, cannot be traced to the voter's identity.
+type: process
+---
+
+<!--
+Article 21.3 of the [Universal Declaration of Human Rights](https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html) regards secret ballots as a basic right by stating:
+
+> The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
+-->

_modules/separation_of_powers.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Separation of Powers
+permalink: /modules/separation_of_powers/
+summary: Different aspects of governance fall under the purview of distinct and countervailing entities.
+type: structure
+---
+
+Separation of powers is a mechanism of checks and balances used in governance to divide decision-making abilities among separate groups. It is used to ensure that no one body or individual has autocratic rule; each group has different responsibilities that will not overreach into those of another. 
+Though separation of powers is frequently associated with the three branch system, such as that used in the U.S. government, some implementations may split power between only two bodies.
+
+**Input:** a democratic system with potential for diffusion of power; political actors or bodies with distinct roles and responsibilities
+
+**Output:** system of governance with at least two political bodies to keep decision-making dissipated and protect democracy
+
+## Background
+
+John Locke was one of the earliest thinkers to voice the importance of a separation of powers. He proposed that governance be divided between a king and parliament, rather than resting solely in the hands of one or the other. Most frequently known for coining the term, however, is the French Enlightenment figure Baron de Montesquieu, who analyzed the benefits of the three-pronged, or tripartite, system of legislative, judiciary, and executive branches in “The Spirit of Laws” (1748). 
+
+While Locke and Montesquieu are framed as the preliminary thinkers in this area, John Calvin advocated for a system akin to a separation of powers two hundred years before. Even Aristotle’s “Politics” mentions a “mixed” government with power spanning between many different political bodies. 
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Prevents consolidation and exploitation of power
+* Holds accountable and responsible each branch
+* Increases likelihood of a fair, just government exempt from prejudicial and biased lawmaking
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Potentially complicates and slows processes of decision-making
+* It can result in a lack of action if the branches cannot reach a consensus due to varying majority beliefs
+* Without proper definition of roles, tasks can fall through the cracks and perpetually be seen as the responsibility of a different branch
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+The tripartite system is utilized in countries around the world including the U.S., the Czech Republic, and France. Not every system looks the same; for example, Malaysia has a parliament as legislative branch, prime minister, cabinet, government and civil service departments as executive, and federal and lower courts as judiciary while the Republic of China has five branches distinct branches.
+
+In smaller scale governance systems, such as those of companies and non-profits, the separation of powers often takes the form of separate roles for the board, CEO, director, and staff. 
+
+### Tools
+
+* The [Carver Policy Governance]( https://www.carvergovernance.com/pg-np.htm) model is based on principles of the separation of powers and can be a useful reference for creating a governance system.
+* The Cullinane Law Group offers an example of the [breakdown of powers]( https://cullinanelaw.com/nonprofit-board-vs-executive-director/) in a nonprofit, though the ideas in this article can be more widely applied to other companies and organizations.
+
+## Further resources
+
+Nazir, M., Ahmad, T., & Khan Afghani, M. A. (2017). Separation of Power: A Comparative Analysis. Commonwealth Law Review Journal, 3.
+Barendt, E. (2017). Separation of powers and constitutional government. In The Rule of Law and the Separation of Powers(pp. 275-295). Routledge.
+Fairlie, J. (1923). The Separation of Powers. Michigan Law Review, 21(4), 393-436. doi:10.2307/1277683

_modules/solidarity.md

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Solidarity
+permalink: /modules/solidarity/
+summary: A commitment to mutual support infuses collection action.
+type: culture
+---
+
+<!--
+* Workers organizations
+* Party whips, enforcing party discipline
+-->

_modules/sortition.md

@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Sortition
+permalink: /modules/sortition/
+summary: Roles with special authority are chosen from among the community at random.
+type: process
+---
+
+Sortition is the random selection of people for positions of authority from a general pool. Those selected may serve individually or in juries and typically have the time and resources to become well informed on the questions they are chosen to decide.
+
+**Input:** census of community members, randomization method, appropriate training
+
+**Output:** advisory recommendation or binding decision
+
+## Background
+
+Sortition was a basic feature of Athenian democracy. During the medieval and early-modern period it was used for governing some Italian city-states, such as Venice and Florence.
+
+In recent political systems, it is used most commonly for the formation of citizen juries for trials. But it has had [other scattered uses](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition#Modern_application) in recent history, from Amish communities to national constitutional reform processes.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Encourages deliberation insulated from external pressures
+* Can enable juries to gain a level of focused expertise on the issue at hand greater than what would be possible for the population as a whole or elected representatives
+
+### Oversights
+
+* May not be fully representative of the population
+* May enable groupthink and negative internal dynamics among selected juries, especially in the absence of a [secret ballot](secret_ballot)
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+* Citizen juries in judicial trials
+* "[Deliberative democracy](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=deliberative democracy china)" processes in China
+* Minds, a social network uses a [jury system for moderation](https://www.minds.com/minds/blog/power-to-the-people-the-minds-jury-system-975486713993859072)
+
+### Tools
+
+* [Aragon Court](https://github.com/aragon/aragon-court) - "handles subjective disputes that cannot be solved by smart contracts" using jurors incentivized to win rewards by playing a [Schelling game](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_point_(game_theory)
+* [Random-Sample Voting](https://rsvoting.org/)
+    - Implementation: [Seventh Estate Polling System](https://github.com/seventh-estate/seventh-estate)
+
+## Further resources
+
+* [Sortition Foundation](https://www.sortitionfoundation.org/)
+* "[Sortition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition)" on Wikipedia
+* Van Reybrouck, David. "[Why Elections Are Bad for Democracy](https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/29/why-elections-are-bad-for-democracy)." _The Guardian_. June 29, 2016.

_modules/stake_weight.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Stake Weight
+permalink: /modules/stake_weight/
+summary: Participants hold power in proportion to their investment in the organization.
+type: decision
+---

_modules/stochastic_choice.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Stochastic Choice
+permalink: /modules/stochastic_choice/
+summary: A choice among options is made at random.
+type: decision
+---

_modules/term_limit.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Term limits
+permalink: /modules/term_limits/
+summary: Roles can be held for a maximum of a fixed period of time.
+type: process
+---
+
+Term limits are a mechanism for governance systems to prevent one individual from being in office for such a period of time that prevents others from participating in governance. They exist as a way to balance power, protect democracy, and prevent dictatorship.
+
+**Input:** agreement on what type of term limits should be imposed and for what amount of time:
+* consecutive term limits mean individuals may serve again after a select number of years
+* lifetime limits mean an individual may not serve again after reaching the term limit
+
+**Output:** governance system that has regular turnover and is inclusive of new individuals’ voices
+
+## Background
+
+In ancient Greece, many Athenian officials under the Boule legislature, or legislature of 500 citizens, were limited to one term, or one year of serving to allow more members of the society to participate in governance. Certain Roman systems also imposed term limits to one year of service for consuls and magistrates.
+
+In the United States, presidential term limits were debated and amendments were drafted more than 200 times between George Washington’s second presidential term to the actual passage of the 22nd amendment in 1951, when Franklin D. Roosevelt’s fourth term raised concerns once again. In fact, term limits were actually omitted from the Articles of Confederation when the Constitution was created. Many democratic republics now impose term limits while parliamentary governments are much less likely to do so.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Prevents one individual from becoming a de facto dictator; prevents a legislature of career politicians in favor of a citizen’s legislature
+* Officials may be more likely to accomplish more for the people they are serving if they are not constantly focused on re-election campaigns
+* Without term limits, incumbents are extremely difficult to overturn due to connections and resources
+* Decreases risk of corruption
+* Brings new ideas and fresh perspectives into governance
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Long-term officials with citizen approval may be booted out of office due to a rule rather than their qualifications or lack of approval
+* Officials who have been in office for extended time may have better experience with the system and be able to impact more productive change due to their large pool of knowledge
+* Without the pressure of re-election, officials may be less likely to accomplish important tasks towards the end of their term
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Many democracies with presidential figures impose term limits, including the U.S., Colombia, Haiti, and within the past three decades, many African countries such as Algeria, Burundi, and the Democratic Republic of Congo.
+
+Concerns for governance systems lacking term limits extend to organizations and corporations as well, as many corporate board positions are seen as lifetime tenures – and this is, for many investors, [a cause for concern](https://www.forbes.com/sites/patricialenkov/2018/08/28/the-why-when-and-how-of-board-refreshment/#4111e17f6fc9), as less than 10% of large companies have age or term limits. [Nonprofit boards](https://www.boardeffect.com/blog/best-practices-nonprofit-board-term-limits/) face a similar situation and often limit service to two consecutive terms or six years total. 
+
+The Sierra Club [constitution](https://www.sierraclub.org/sites/www.sierraclub.org/files/Bylaws-Standing-Rules.pdf), for example, states that:
+“Each Director shall be elected for a term of three (3) years. A Director may serve for an unlimited number of terms, providing that a minimum period of one year's absence from the Board shall occur after any two (2) consecutive full three-year terms.”
+
+### Tools
+
+* Sample clauses for establishing term limits can be found on [this](https://www.lawinsider.com/clause/term-limits) Law Insider page.
+* [This](https://www.boardeffect.com/blog/best-practices-nonprofit-board-term-limits/) page from Board Effect offers best practices for implementing nonprofit board term limits.
+
+## Further resources
+
+Lenkov, P. (2018). “[The Why, When, and How of Board Refreshment](https://www.forbes.com/sites/patricialenkov/2018/08/28/the-why-when-and-how-of-board-refreshment/#4111e17f6fc9).” Forbes.
+
+Nili, Y., Rosenblum, D. (2019). [Board Diversity by Term Limits?]( https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3353493). 71 Alabama Law Review; Univ. of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1467. 
+
+Baturo, A., & Elgie, R. (Eds.). (2019). The Politics of Presidential Term Limits. Oxford University Press.
+
+Klašnja, M., & Titiunik, R. (2017). The incumbency curse: Weak parties, term limits, and unfulfilled accountability. American Political Science Review, 111(1), 129-148.
+
+

_modules/transparency.md

@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Transparency
+permalink: /modules/transparency/
+summary: Important information is widely available.
+type: process
+---
+
+Transparency refers to the disclosure of information about a particular decision, process, or action. It serves as a way to hold accountable groups of people in power.
+
+**Input:** available, honest, and open information on governance processes, decision-making, and allocation of resources for stakeholders and those governed
+
+**Output:** more accountable governance system that offer readily accessible, in-depth information to relevant participants or inquirers 
+
+## Background
+
+An early Western example of transparency can be found in Athenian democracy and the Roman Republic; public finances were overseen by a board of citizens.
+
+The Pendleton Act of 1883 was an early attempt to add transparency to the United States government by outlining regulations and pay classifications for civil servants. By the 1950s, most Western European countries developed rules to ensure transparency; such regulations are a requirement for countries in the European Union and the Council of Europe. In 1966, Lyndon Johnson passed the Freedom of Information Act in the United States and a host of other transparency regulations were passed throughout the 1970’s.
+
+## Feedback loops
+
+### Sensitivities
+
+* Provides greater information for constituencies
+* Informed constituencies hold those in positions of power accountable and spark productive dialogue
+* Create an atmosphere that is forward-facing due to availability of information – officials don’t need to explain past decisions and processes to already-informed citizens
+* Policies tend to be better for constituents due to aforementioned benefits
+* Allocation of financial resources can be more intentional and effective in a transparent system
+* Within an organization, transparency can lead to a more productive workflow because each members of the organization is informed and decision-making is clear and collaborative
+
+### Oversights
+
+* Implementing transparency mechanisms into preexisting governance system can have some start-up costs and create new responsibilities for employees
+* Though information may be readily available, it may be misinterpreted, misrepresented, or used for nefarious purposes
+* Officials may feel reluctant to speak freely if their communications are all subject to disclosure
+* Organizations may face a difficult balance in public transparency and keeping important information confidential
+
+## Implementations
+
+### Communities
+
+Government efforts at transparency vary; the city of Louisville, KY makes government spending transparent with their [“Your Tax Dollars at Work” tool](https://louisvilleky.gov/government/management-budget/services/your-tax-dollars-work) while other cities offer exhaustive, searchable sites with transparent information about projects and spending.
+
+Other organizations and companies operate in a transparent manner, such as Patagonia – where you can track your clothing’s environmental footprint – and Buffer, a social media company whose transparency began with having revenue publically available on their website.
+
+### Tools
+
+* SumAll, hailed as a company succeeding greatly at transparency, recommends tools such as Slack and Wrike for communication and project management in [this](https://blog.sumall.com/journal/tools-we-use-for-transparency.html) blog post.
+* Monster offers a [transparency assessment](https://hiring.monster.com/employer-resources/workforce-management/company-culture/corporate-transparency/) for corporate entities to better understand and improve their own practices. 
+* Open Society Foundation offers [this]( https://web.archive.org/web/20170218030712/http://www.transparency-initiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Opening-Government3.pdf) guide to best practices in transparency.
+
+## Further resources
+
+* Pozen, D. E., & Schudson, M. (2018). _Troubling transparency: The history and future of freedom of information_. New York: Columbia University Press.
+* Bolivar, M. P. R., Galera, A. N., & Munoz, L. A. (2015). "Governance, transparency and accountability: An international comparison." _Journal of Policy Modeling_, 37(1), 136-174. doi:10.1016/j.jpolmod.2015.01.010
+* Kosack, S., & Fung, A. (2014). "Does transparency improve governance?" _Annual Review of Political Science_, 17(1), 65-87. doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-032210-144356

_modules/values.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: page
+title: Values
+permalink: /modules/values/
+summary: Certain animating ideas unite the community.
+type: culture
+---