agentic-govbot/templates/README.md

# Governance Constitution Templates

This directory contains ready-to-use governance constitution templates based on [CommunityRule](https://communityrule.info/) patterns. Each template provides a complete governance framework that can be used with the governance bot.

## How to Use These Templates

1. **Choose a template** that matches your community's governance philosophy
2. **Copy the template** to your project root or config directory as `constitution.md`
3. **Customize it** to fit your specific community needs
4. **Configure your bot** to use the constitution file
5. **Iterate** - constitutions can be amended through their own processes

## Available Templates

### 1. Benevolent Dictator (`benevolent-dictator.md`)
**"The Benevolent Dictator holds ultimate decision-making power, until the group is ready for a more inclusive structure."**

**Best for:**
- New communities establishing initial direction
- Projects with a clear founder/leader
- Situations requiring quick decisive action
- Communities planning to transition to shared governance

**Key features:**
- Single leader with final authority
- Community input and discussion
- Delegation of specific powers
- Built-in transition mechanisms
- Transparent decision-making

### 2. Circles (`circles.md`)
**"Units called Circles have the ability to decide and act on matters in their domains, which their members agree on through a Council."**

**Best for:**
- Communities with distinct functional areas
- Organizations needing domain expertise
- Groups wanting distributed decision-making
- Communities with specialized working groups

**Key features:**
- Domain-based autonomous units
- Representative council for coordination
- Lazy consensus decision-making
- Clear boundaries between domains
- Scalable structure

### 3. Consensus (`consensus.md`)
**"Decisions that affect the group collectively should involve participation of all participants."**

**Best for:**
- Communities valuing inclusive participation
- Groups with strong solidarity culture
- Situations where buy-in is crucial
- Communities willing to invest time in deliberation

**Key features:**
- Full member participation in decisions
- Thorough deliberation processes
- Block rights for fundamental concerns
- Do-ocracy for personal initiatives
- Focus on addressing all concerns

### 4. Do-ocracy (`do-ocracy.md`)
**"Those who take initiative to do something in the group can decide how they do it."**

**Best for:**
- Action-oriented communities
- Groups valuing individual initiative
- Projects emphasizing experimentation
- Communities wanting low bureaucracy

**Key features:**
- Authority through contribution
- Low barriers to action
- Community lobbying for major changes
- Accountability through reversibility
- Trust-based culture

### 5. Elected Board (`elected-board.md`)
**"Policy-making body selected through voting processes."**

**Best for:**
- Larger communities needing representation
- Organizations requiring regular leadership
- Groups with diverse stakeholder interests
- Communities wanting democratic accountability

**Key features:**
- Regular elections
- Representative decision-making
- Member petition rights
- Board accountability mechanisms
- Clear delegation structure

### 6. Jury (`jury.md`)
**"Proposals are shaped and decided on by randomly selected juries."**

**Best for:**
- Communities wanting fairness through randomness
- Groups concerned about power concentration
- Organizations valuing deliberation
- Communities with engaged membership

**Key features:**
- Random selection (sortition)
- Rotating participation
- Informed jury deliberation
- Policy register and precedents
- Legislature coordinates process

### 7. Petition (`petition.md`)
**"Community-wide proposal and voting mechanism."**

**Best for:**
- Communities valuing direct democracy
- Groups with active, engaged members
- Organizations wanting simple governance
- Communities comfortable with referendums

**Key features:**
- Any member can petition
- Direct community-wide voting
- Simple majority for most decisions
- Supermajority for constitutional changes
- No representative layer

### 8. Self-Appointed Board (`self-appointed-board.md`)
**"Self-selecting leadership determines policies and implementation."**

**Best for:**
- Communities with clear mission/values
- Projects requiring consistent vision
- Organizations valuing expertise and experience
- Groups comfortable with trustee model

**Key features:**
- Board selects successors
- Stability and continuity
- Merit-based selection
- Member feedback mechanisms
- Transparent decision-making

## Comparison Table

| Template | Decision Speed | Participation | Complexity | Scalability |
|----------|---------------|---------------|------------|-------------|
| Benevolent Dictator | Very Fast | Low | Simple | Good |
| Circles | Fast | Medium | Medium | Excellent |
| Consensus | Slow | Very High | Medium | Limited |
| Do-ocracy | Very Fast | High | Simple | Good |
| Elected Board | Medium | Medium | Medium | Excellent |
| Jury | Slow | Medium | High | Good |
| Petition | Medium | Very High | Simple | Good |
| Self-Appointed Board | Fast | Low | Simple | Good |

## Customization Tips

When adapting a template:

1. **Adjust timeframes** - Discussion and voting periods to fit your community's pace
2. **Modify thresholds** - Voting percentages and quorum requirements
3. **Add your values** - Incorporate your code of conduct and community principles
4. **Specify your context** - Platform-specific details (Mastodon, Discord, etc.)
5. **Keep it readable** - The bot interprets natural language, so write clearly

## Combining Templates

You can mix elements from different templates:
- Start with Benevolent Dictator, transition to Elected Board
- Use Circles for some domains, Consensus for others
- Combine Do-ocracy with Petition for different decision types
- Layer Jury on top of Elected Board for major decisions

## Common Customizations

**Timeframes:**
- Standard proposal: 5-7 days typical
- Urgent: 2-3 days
- Constitutional: 10-14 days

**Voting Thresholds:**
- Simple majority: 50% + 1
- Supermajority: 60-67%
- Consensus: 90-100%

**Quorum Requirements:**
- Low engagement: no quorum
- Medium: 10-20% of members
- High: 30-50% of members

## Dispute Resolution Templates

**NEW!** We've added comprehensive dispute resolution templates in the `dispute-resolution/` subdirectory.

Good governance requires not just decision-making processes, but also ways to handle conflicts. The dispute resolution templates can be integrated into any governance constitution as conflict resolution articles.

**8 Dispute Resolution Processes Available:**
- **Peer-to-Peer** - Self-facilitated direct resolution
- **Chosen Facilitator** - Mutually selected facilitator guides process
- **Restorative Justice** - Circle process emphasizing healing
- **Transformative Justice** - Addressing root causes and systemic change
- **Community Jury** - Random selection for formal decisions
- **Community Referee** - Single trained referee decides
- **Facilitation Council** - Panel of facilitators manages process
- **Shalish Mediation** - Traditional village mediation modernized

See `dispute-resolution/README.md` for detailed comparison and guidance on choosing the right process for your community.

**Integration Options:**
1. Add one dispute resolution article to your constitution
2. Create multiple pathways for different severity levels
3. Build an escalation ladder from simple to complex processes

## Testing Your Constitution

Before deployment:
1. Review with your founding members
2. Simulate common scenarios
3. Test with the bot using CLI mode
4. Run a trial period with amendments allowed
5. Document learnings and adjust

## Contributing

Found an issue with a template? Have a suggestion? Open an issue or PR at the main repository.

## Credits

**Governance Templates** are inspired by [CommunityRule](https://communityrule.info/), a project by the Media Enterprise Design Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder.

**Dispute Resolution Templates** are adapted from the [Dispute Protocol Builder](https://git.medlab.host/dispute-protocol/builder-prototype), also by the Media Enterprise Design Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder.

All templates have been adapted for use with agentic governance bots and formatted in natural language for AI interpretation.

## License

[To be determined - match project license]