Removed and adjusted a bunch of modules

_config.yml

@@ -50,7 +50,8 @@ collections:
 # Excluded items can be processed by explicitly listing the directories or
 # their entries' file path in the `include:` list.
 #
-# exclude:
+exclude:
+    - archival/
 #   - .sass-cache/
 #   - .jekyll-cache/
 #   - gemfiles/

_guides/modules.html

@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ permalink: /guides/modules/
 		<span class="module" id="module-{{ module.title | slugify }}"
 			  draggable="true" ondragstart="drag(event)" ondragend="dragEnd()">
 		  <span id="module-name" title="{{ module.summary }}">{{ module.title }}</span>
-          <a target="_blank" href="{{ module.url }}">
+          <a href="{{ module.url }}">
             <img title="More info" draggable="false" class="module-logo"
                  src="{% link assets/tabler_icons/info-circle.svg %}" />
           </a>

_modules/access.md

@@ -1,7 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: module
-title: Access
-permalink: /modules/access/
-summary: A system for determining who has rights to control, change, or manage shared resources.
-type: process
----

_modules/accountability_process.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+layout: module
+title: Accountability Process
+permalink: /modules/accountability_process/
+summary: Redress for wrong-doing occurs through repairing the harm done.
+type: process
+---

_modules/canvassing.md

@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
----
-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/condorcet.md

@@ -1,51 +0,0 @@
----
-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/constitution.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 layout: module
-title: Consensus
+title: Constitution
 permalink: /modules/constitution/
 summary: A shared set of agreements underlies all future ones and is harder to change than other agreements.
 type: structure

_modules/expiration.md

@@ -1,7 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: module
-title: Expiration
-permalink: /modules/expiration/
-summary: An organization, entity, or process comes to an end.
-type: process
----

_modules/fact_finding.md

@@ -1,55 +0,0 @@
----
-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/identity.md

@@ -2,6 +2,6 @@
 layout: module
 title: Identity
 permalink: /modules/identity/
-summary: A mechanism for identifying participants as appropriate for the community.
-type: process
+summary: How participants represent themselves and are seen by the community.
+type: structure
 ---

_modules/lottery_voting.md

@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
----
-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/multicameralism.md

@@ -1,56 +0,0 @@
----
-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/proportional_representation.md

@@ -1,51 +0,0 @@
----
-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

@@ -1,50 +0,0 @@
----
-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/referendum.md

@@ -3,5 +3,5 @@ layout: module
 title: Referendum
 permalink: /modules/referendum/
 summary: A decision is posed to the community's members at large.
-type: process
+type: decision
 ---

_modules/restorative_justice.md

@@ -1,7 +0,0 @@
----
-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/secret_ballot.md

@@ -1,13 +0,0 @@
----
-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

@@ -1,53 +0,0 @@
----
-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/sortition.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ layout: module
 title: Sortition
 permalink: /modules/sortition/
 summary: Roles with special authority are chosen from among the community at random.
-type: process
+type: decision
 ---
 
 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.

_modules/stake.md

@@ -3,5 +3,5 @@ layout: module
 title: Stake
 permalink: /modules/stake/
 summary: Participants contribute something of value to indicate commitment.
-type: process
----
+type: culture
+---

_modules/term_limit.md

@@ -1,65 +0,0 @@
----
-layout: module
-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.
-
-