Security

Welcome to DirectDemocracyS.

This is our informative article for anyone who receives the invitation to study our system comprehensively, with an open mind, therefore without being superficial and without making hasty judgments.

Our system is robust and detailed to protect the community, but the user experience is seamless and guided.

Although it may seem like a complicated system, we can assure you that with a little attention and willingness, everything is very simple, fast, and secure. From the very beginning, you'll receive all the necessary information, all the direct and ongoing support you need, and all the instructions you need to complete a wide range of activities with us.

The first question someone asks when receiving a flyer or message from us is always the same: can I trust them? Our answer to everyone is always the same. You shouldn't trust anything or anyone, now or ever. Therefore, if you like what we're doing, how we're doing it, and if you feel compatible and competent, we invite you to join us by registering with a free, completely anonymous personal profile, so you can see for yourself that what we've always said, to everyone, is actually applied internally. We don't ask for your trust, we ask for your intelligence. See for yourself whether our actions match our words.

The second thing that surprises you is that none of us are inviting you to join us. We have a fundamental rule that demonstrates our esteem and respect. First, we always ask you to be fully informed, with an open mind to our innovation, which is an alternative to everything you know. We ask you not to be superficial, and therefore not to make hasty final judgments before fully understanding our enormous potential. We don't invite anyone to join us directly, because it must be your conscious and informed choice. In short, we invite everyone to study all our public information, exclusively on our platforms.

The third thing you'll immediately notice: the complexity of our entire system. The world is not a simple place, and even though our main features and pioneering solutions are relatively simple, making them work optimally requires very detailed implementation rules that address every tiny aspect. Don't be afraid, practice and, above all, mutual understanding will make everything simpler, faster, and much safer. To determine whether you like our system and whether you're compatible with our rules, simply read our informative article on the home page of our websites. The rest of this study will help you enter our system prepared, preventing any potential errors.

Perhaps the most important thing, and one that not everyone immediately understands, is that DirectDemocracyS is a collective project, designed to make it impossible for any one person, or group of people, to use it in despicable ways. Simply put, we are perhaps the only ones created for the collective good, incapable of being corrupted by power, by lobbies, and by individuals—rich, powerful, or famous. We can never be dictators, precisely because of our system architecture, created by specialized engineers who have made our system different and better than all others. All of us, and all those who join us, have made DirectDemocracyS serve the common good, without discrimination, and not for partisan interests.

Shared leadership and collective ownership, along with many other key characteristics, solve many problems, thanks to our unique and inimitable way of communicating, collaborating, and accomplishing countless tasks together.

Of course, the fourth thing everyone notices is a series of related questions: how much and why do I pay? Is there a minimum attendance requirement? Am I obligated to carry out activities with DirectDemocracyS? Let's answer right away: to join us, to be part of our large family, you must register, creating a one-time personal profile. The type of user you will have depends on various factors, including: your financial means (if you don't have money, you can create a personal profile that is and will always be free), your free time (if you don't have free time, you can create a free personal profile that doesn't require any attendance), and the activities you want to do with us (if you don't want to volunteer with us, you can create a free personal profile, which doesn't require any mandatory activities). Even with a free personal profile, you can do a wide range of activities with us, accumulating significant points, without spending a single cent, without being required to be present, and without any mandatory activities with us, except for those mandatory settings for everyone, which must be done upon first login to protect your personal data. These activities are in the best interest of all our users, and include: 1. two-factor authentication (protects your personal profile); 2. privacy settings (protects your personal data); 3. choosing whether, how, when, and for what to receive our notifications (we recommend setting up system notifications to see the latest news only when you log in to our platforms).

If you want to unlock greater potential, you can choose higher-level user categories, which require a small but crucial annual fee (which guarantees us self-financing, freedom, neutrality, security, and independence), a minimum attendance requirement of at least 20 minutes per day (which can be achieved through one or more daily logins), or, alternatively, 120 minutes per week (on one or more days, through one or more daily logins). Finally, each higher-level user must perform some volunteer work during their mandatory attendance time to keep our entire enormous mechanism running smoothly. Some money, some time, and some activities, to make our system fully functional, regardless of the number of users/voters we have. Only in this way will we be resilient and avoid problems.

But let's see what concretely we need to do to join us?

You must fill out a simple registration form, independently, or with the help of someone you know in our system . If you don't know anyone, or if you don't want to ask for help from someone you know, we will provide you with a member chosen at random, resident in your country, or with the same citizenship as you.

You can also do everything by yourself, but we recommend that you get help from someone who is authorized to provide support and to officially invite you, because everything will be simpler, faster, and more complete, and you won't risk making small mistakes.

What do you need to join us?

You'll need to choose a username according to our rules. Your username is the name we'll call you in our system. It can be a nickname, a random code, or even your real first and last name, although we recommend remaining completely anonymous, at least in your personal profile.

You will need to choose a password of at least 12 characters, with letters that do not form words, both lowercase and uppercase, non-consecutive numbers, and special characters.

That's it! You don't need anything else for your free personal profile.

What do you need to join us?

A valid, adequately protected personal email address from any email service provider. Any email address will do. It doesn't have to be a temporary email address, because after completing registration and submitting the form, you'll receive an activation link to your email address. You can click it or copy and paste it into any browser to confirm your email address.

A valid personal telephone number, to which you will receive a unique activation code, which you must send to us via email so that we can activate your personal profile.

That's it! You don't need anything else for your free personal profile.

Here's an informative article that contains some useful links for many activities, and a few quick rules:

https:// free .directdemocracys.org/home/our-system/public/all-our-activities/getting-started/rules-and-useful-links

Now some useful tips for everyone.

If one of our users, authorized to send invitations, invites you to learn more about our platforms, we recommend doing so. It's free, secure, and you'll surely be pleasantly surprised. Always verify the authorizations of anyone contacting you on behalf of DirectDemocracyS, using this contact form at this link, explaining the situation in detail:

https://contacts.directdemocracys.org/contacts/specials-groups/securities-groups/authorization-verification-group

You will receive a response by email.

Please note: If you are already a member, we recommend you log in to our contact website using the login credentials you set up yourself on our free website.

If you'd like to join us, do so with a simple invitation, or an official one from one of our users authorized to send invitations. You'll enjoy numerous benefits and advantages if someone helps you and offers their full cooperation, even after you've registered and activated your profile. It's very helpful to have a trusted person to help you, in addition to our 24/7 support. If you don't know anyone in our system, or someone you know isn't yet authorized to send invitations, you can still connect with one of our official representatives via a contact form at this link:

https://contacts.directdemocracys.org/contacts/infos-contacts/i-want-to-be-invited

The person will be from your country, preferably close to your home, will speak your language (always specify your preferred language and your primary country in the form), and will help you according to our rules.

We recommend taking advantage of the opportunity to be and remain completely anonymous at all times, and making only your username visible, with no other personal information. You can then, if you wish, share certain information with those you trust most.

In DirectDemocracyS, the blue checkmarks next to the username, in our social area, mean reliability and a verified and guaranteed identity. Therefore, even with the necessary precautions, people who have the blue checkmark are usually more trustworthy than those who do not have the blue checkmark.

In DirectDemocracyS, public areas are used only by our official members, who are part of the management and control groups for public areas. Unauthorized posts in public areas are strictly prohibited. You can engage in a wide range of activities—in groups, pages, events, and many other activities you participate in—without ever using public areas, which are reserved for authorized individuals for reasons of security, order, and organization.

Don't send friend requests without authorization, and don't disturb other users, groups, or other activities to which you're not invited or that aren't within your capabilities. Communication, collaboration, and activities are permitted according to very detailed rules within the various groups; therefore, friend requests are not permitted, and accepting such requests is prohibited. If direct contact is absolutely necessary, you can always request authorization from the support groups.

Don't lie or provide false information on registration forms, contact forms , support request forms, or authorization request forms. Always be honest because our entire community will always be there for you.

Everyone who joins us, regardless of user type, begins accumulating valuable points from the moment they join. This is done individually, but also within various groups and through the various activities they participate in. These points are very important because they create meritocratic hierarchies based on mutual trust. Those with more points have greater "power" than those with fewer, simply because of the various activities they perform, their behavior, and their time as our users. Anyone who lies on registration forms or other forms will not be able to obtain the benefits and privileges offered to those with more points.

Annual fees, attendance requirements, and volunteer activities are only available for higher-level user levels; they don't apply to free and access users. To avoid any misunderstandings, we'll reiterate: there's no charge and no obligation if you decide to join us with a free personal profile. If you need more potential, and if you meet all the requirements, you can request a higher-level user level at any time.

When we created our DirectDemocracyS system, we decided to always be on the right side, and to do so, we created one of our five special groups, entirely dedicated to logic, common sense, truth, reality, research, consistency, and mutual respect. A long name for fundamental activities that make DirectDemocracyS credible, reliable, loyal, sincere, and with shared official positions.

But let's talk about these official positions right away, because perhaps some, studying our system, might believe that those who join us can somehow be forced to think as they're told. It would be wrong and counterproductive for us to teach anything, to anyone, or to try to manipulate people to change their way of thinking. For DirectDemocracyS and all its members, it's important to learn from everyone who joins us. We apply the same method to our official positions, which are decided by large majorities, based on the importance of the various decisions. There's not just an internal majority that decides, and a minority that opposes, but often, for some official positions, quorums of 66%, 75%, 85%, even 95% are required, and for very important rules and positions, and therefore, for fundamental decisions and positions, even unanimity is required. Let's take a brief but clear example. If we decide to take an official position, determined according to our voting rules, based on the various quorums established by the respective groups, that will be the official position of the entire DirectDemocracyS system. The decision must be supported by everyone, but those who disagree can express themselves freely, distinguishing between "we" and "I." They must implement the decisions of our collective system, out of loyalty and respect for the democratic will, but they can say: "I disagree," and they can continue to work, individually and in groups, to demonstrate the value of their ideas. No one will ever be expelled for what they think, say, demonstrate, or write, if they do so in the appropriate ways, at the right times, and in the right places. This method prevents any internal conflict, any discrimination, and allows everyone to be truly free. This method of managing dissent makes us unique and inimitable, and for us it is a rule, and a fundamental methodology, for implementing unity in diversity.

DirectDemocracyS, through its technological integrations with allddsAI (we are the first and only AI democracy, with technology groups and human bridges), through the interface of our private ddsAI AI model, and above all through our specialist groups, composed of our official members, provides comprehensive, free, neutral, independent, and secure information to all its users, groups, and activities, ensuring a professional system and competent decisions. This is what makes us unique and inimitable, as it solves many of the problems of direct democracy, but also of representative democracy: incompetent decision-making and voting without the basis for optimal choices.

Let's explain this fundamental concept better.

Potentially infinite individual and group freedom, which ends exactly where the freedom of another individual or group begins, is not enough, resulting in pluralism and therefore authentic democracy.

A truly shared leadership, with power developed horizontally , therefore “from the bottom up”, and not even the collective property rights of all our members are enough.

To achieve the best results, completely competent decisions are required, which cannot be achieved without giving everyone who must vote and therefore decide the opportunity to have complete knowledge: 1. knowing the topic, or the candidates, 2. knowing all the various possibilities, and 3. knowing all the expected consequences for each of the possibilities.

How many times in old and failing traditional systems do voters have to decide on a popular referendum (usually politicized and rarely explained independently), or choose political parties (often voting out of habit, family tradition, having been manipulated, and in some cases even lied to, by programs often not fully implemented), or choose people to represent them—chosen not by you, but by their respective political parties, without the opportunity to know them and fully evaluate them? Essentially, you vote for people you've only heard speak for a few minutes, almost never with a cross-examination, and without the opportunity to ask all the questions yourself. In DirectDemocracyS, this doesn't happen, because it's our users/voters, on our platforms, who evaluate, select, and perform all the necessary activities to choose our political representatives. We do this with our political representative selection panels, which all our official members can participate in, with internal election campaigns at all levels, both online and in person, and with our closed online primary elections, which, if successful, allow our political organization to propose the best, most competent, and highly professional candidates.

Brief explanation. In many cases, we've seen candidates who are incompetent, or have actual conflicts of interest, or have a complete lack of meritocracy. This is impossible in DirectDemocracyS precisely because of our implementation rules, which allow everyone to be a protagonist, but only the best to obtain more important roles and greater responsibility. It's not just the rich, powerful, or famous who advance, but only those who truly deserve it. A brief example. We often cite the example of people famous on the internet, with many followers, and in many cases, in many countries, these influencers and "web personalities" often have the best intentions (they want to do a good job), but in many cases have serious shortcomings (they lack the skills to deliver what they promise), which therefore make them incompetent and unsuitable for certain roles. You might say: if they get the votes, they have every right to govern and make laws, and that's true, but the consequences aren't always good for everyone; Therefore, it is much better to have competent people who deserve to obtain important roles and greater responsibility.

Many political forces have elected political representatives, who often then made serious mistakes, even failing to keep their campaign promises. This is impossible at DirectDemocracyS, for simple reasons: 1. Political representatives are selected by our groups, which all our members can join; 2. Internal election campaigns are reserved for all our users with verified identities and members, who are entitled to vote; 3. Closed online primaries are held at various local levels, from the smallest to the largest, and are eliminatory, meaning only those with the most votes advance to the next round, where they will then participate in the actual election campaigns and elections. All our users/voters on our platforms can interact directly with our candidates, continuously. Not only that, we all decide together, each in their own areas of residence and citizenship, on the entire political program. This will then be implemented jointly by our political representatives and our users/voters on our platforms, thanks to comprehensive management and collective control by our voters/users on our platforms, before, during, and, for the first time in the world, even after the elections. Therefore, the relationship between our voters/users and our political representatives is the freest, most democratic, secure, and professional of all the alternatives to our system.

But why doesn't everyone do as we do? The motivations are tied to the logic of power, wealth, and fame; other political forces are often dominated by lobbies and very powerful, rich, and famous people. They don't simply serve the interests of the community, as ours do. They are often forced to serve the interests of a few, due to a lack of independence and neutrality. None of this can happen in DirectDemocracyS, thanks to shared leadership and collective ownership, which, together with complete management and control over political representatives, and properly informed users/voters, make DirectDemocracyS pioneering, unique, and inimitable. In addition to the control of external forces over the established political forces, there are also power logics with internal and external struggles, which prevent politicians from working for the common good, but force them to defend themselves and attack other political forces and other political representatives, often even those of their own political force. These internal and external struggles do not exist in DirectDemocracyS, because the system itself is designed to prevent such reprehensible behavior. Finally, there's the will. In other political forces, there's a focus on protagonism, with a few leaders and very few governing groups, who wield enormous power. In DirectDemocracyS, everything is equally distributed, but meritocracy is rewarded. This is demonstrated in various ways, especially through accumulated points and the evaluations of our specialist groups, which all our official members can join based on their expertise. When it comes to choosing in our internal, closed online primary elections, we know the points accumulated by each candidate, as well as the evaluations of our specialists, who create actual rankings based on the individual abilities of all the candidates. Obviously, the decisions are made by our authorized users, those with verified and guaranteed identities, demonstrated by the blue check mark next to their username (allowing for anonymity) in our social area and on our platforms. Seeing these rankings makes it easier for the most competent and skilled to win internally and represent us externally, in electoral campaigns and real elections. In all other systems, leaders or ruling groups can be attacked in various ways, damaging entire political forces. In DirectDemocracyS, this is impossible, thanks to shared leadership, collective ownership, and the division of representative roles. Those who carry out political representation activities cannot simultaneously manage our political organization and our system, and vice versa. This eliminates conflicts of interest and prevents the accumulation of power by a few individuals and groups. Even if someone were to attack, even unfairly, or through legal action, blackmail, or other methods, anyone in our system could never pose a threat to the entire system, which would collectively defend each of our members unjustly accused. For us, a person is innocent until the final appeal has been rejected and they have been definitively convicted. This applies both to those within our system and to those outside.

At DirectDemocracyS, programs are decided together—political representatives and our voters/users—on our platforms. They are implemented together, each with their own role, and can be changed, integrated, improved, innovated, and updated, depending on the various situations, by deciding everything together. At this point, everyone will ask: why only on your platforms? Why only your voters/users? On our platforms, our users/voters are protected, properly informed, and do not risk manipulation or ideological brainwashing. It is a safe space for us all to work together. Only our users/voters can manage and control our political representatives, because they are our political representatives, and they represent all of us, who are perhaps the first to assume full responsibility for every consequence of our every decision. Technically, others should also be held accountable: both the political forces and their political representatives, and all those who vote for them. At DirectDemocracyS, this responsibility is comprehensive, collective, and publicly declared. This is true not only of pursuing our own interests, but of all people, without discrimination, whether they voted for us or not. We have no preferences, but we recognize the values of equality and meritocracy, which must be guaranteed to everyone, always together, and continuously. Anyone can join us, and if they meet all the requirements, can be part of our shared leadership and our collective ownership, but they must do so by respecting all our rules, methodologies, instructions, and motivations, which make DirectDemocracyS innovative, alternative, and superior to all others, because it is more equitable, meritocratic, fair, and safe.

We have created a valid, truly functional alternative to all other systems, and for those who feel unrepresented by other political forces and the usual political representatives, our political organization welcomes anyone who wants to join us with the best intentions.

In January 2026, many of our visitors asked us for an official position on Greenland, while many of our specialist groups follow all international news with great attention.

Unlike those whose minds are limited by propaganda, manipulation, fake news, and old, failed ideologies, at DirectDemocracyS, we base our work on facts and truth, based on highly intelligent rules. We certainly don't want to offend those who are envious, hateful, resentful, or who disagree with us; we simply note that many people fail to use logic, common sense, pragmatism, and mutual respect. When we say there are people with limited minds, it's because many people have a tendency to listen only to those who say what they want to hear, to see only what they want to see, and to read only what they want to see written. In essence, we harshly criticize those who don't look at the facts, all the facts, from a 360-degree perspective. Lacking a comprehensive view, we define their minds as limited. As we often say, all old systems and all old traditional political forces have a tendency to always want to criticize what their opponents do, sometimes considering them as enemies, and not as people who might have good ideas.

At DirectDemocracyS we have no favorites to defend at all costs, nor adversaries to denigrate no matter what they do, but above all we are indebted to no one, we have no masters, and we have no reverence or fear of always and only telling the truth.

Our consistency from the first word spoken publicly to the last often amazes not only people, but even many Artificial Intelligences, when they have an overview of our project and not limited to a few informative articles.

We don't claim to be always right, but we're certainly not biased; therefore, we can be trusted, because we're rarely wrong.

Our official positions are decided in very detailed ways, and are never the decisions of individuals, but the work of many groups of specialists, and we often vote to decide how we think about everything, and what we say is so clear and detailed that it cannot be interpreted except exactly as we make it public.

Greenland must always and exclusively belong to those who live there, not because we have preferences, but because these are our fundamental rules, and we don't change our minds based on which way the wind blows. We won't repeat everything, but we invite you to carefully study the informative article on ownership at this link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/law/info/fundamental-questions/explanations/the-ownership

But we must follow the developments that see President Trump's United States claiming all of Greenland with great attention, and with the right amount of concern.

To understand our views, you might also find it helpful to read this informative article on our pragmatism, so you can understand our official positions:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/law/info/fundamental-questions/explanations/we-are-pragmatic

To clear up any doubts, we need to make a brief but fundamental premise.

For us, individual, group, and peoples' freedom must always be potentially infinite, but it ends exactly where the freedom of another person, group, or people begins. Freedom has the positive consequence of the possibility of implementing democracy. Obviously, the only authentic and complete democracy over time is our DirectDemocracy, that is, direct democracy with voters' continuous management and control over their political representatives.

While we love and respect all people equally, we do not love all political systems equally. Therefore, while we do not hate anyone, none of us loves or supports any kind of dictatorship, or any type of politics, that does not allow for complete freedom. This, as we have said, leads to the creation of credible and free opposition, and thus political pluralism and democracy. We will always support people who, alone, without violent intervention and without external influence, but with determination, peacefully overthrow all dictatorial regimes, anywhere in the world.

We do this not out of hatred, but out of pure survival, even for our own system. In Western countries, which are partially free and only partially democratic during election campaigns (with pluralism, and therefore credible opposition), we as the DirectDemocracyS system, despite great difficulty and numerous attempts to boycott, slow us down, and stop us, could still exist and freely implement our activities and our innovations, completely alternative to all other systems. In dictatorships of any kind, such as the Russian oligarchic dictatorship led by President Putin and his regime oligarchs, or in the Chinese party and single-track thinking, led by President Xi Jinping's Communist Party and its regime bureaucrats, and in all the various dictatorships around the world, DirectDemocracyS would hardly be able to exist or function, simply because the respective dictators would know that for them, our success would mean the end—not physical, but political. To obtain the right to exist in dictatorships, we have foreseen many stages, all very efficient, gradual, and very intelligent, trying to peacefully obtain the right to exist.

To better understand our positions and motivations, we recommend you carefully read this informative article at this link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/law/info/questions-and-answers/political-strategy-questions/pro-western

This post on our blog also explains some concepts well at this link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/utility/blog/freedom-and-democracy-are-non-negotiable

but there are many other informative articles like this link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/law/info/fundamental-questions/let-s-talk-about-politics/democracy

this link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/law/info/fundamental-questions/our-motivations/serious-political-organization

Greenland, therefore, must remain the exclusive property of its inhabitants, because it is right that it should be so. Unfortunately, international politics, throughout human history, has almost never taken justice, fairness, and reason into account, instead imposing increasingly vague and poorly detailed rules of international law, which have allowed the rule of the strongest, with the victors often humiliating, and humiliating, the weakest. The United Nations is inefficient, slow, and does not represent the people, but the governments of the various countries. It therefore represents the power of the few, and not the power of all, as DirectDemocracyS does. DirectDemocracyS will create within it the World Peoples' Organization, also giving stateless peoples, such as the Kurds and many others, their own elected representatives, not those appointed by the various governments. We have discussed this several times in various informative articles, which we invite you to search for on our websites.

If President Trump has a surgical, albeit completely illegal, plan to remove President Maduro from Venezuela, as we discussed in this informative article at this link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/home/all-news/world-news/south-america-news/venezuela-news/us-attack-on-venezuela

and at this link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/home/all-news/world-news/south-america-news/venezuela-news/arrest-of-president-maduro

In our previous article on President Maduro's arrest, we engaged in an interesting and detailed discussion of international law, which everyone uses for their own self-interest, not as a bastion of justice, but to wage political battles and justify partisan positions, often justifying violence. The hypocrisy and inconsistency of those who are always politicized and biased.

President Trump serves his country's strategic, military, economic, and financial interests, and theoretically each of us would do the same. However, he cannot do one thing: betray his commitments, both within NATO and in diplomatic, economic, and financial relations with the European Union, and fail to uphold the commitments and guarantees given to Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum. While he is partially right in eliminating dictatorships around the world, and is almost a liberator—provided sovereignty is returned to the respective peoples and the living conditions, freedoms, and democracy of all citizens of liberated countries are improved—if he were to buy, or worse, attack a NATO country, or part of it, he would be a traitor, a hypocrite, and an unreliable person . For us at DirectDemocracyS, his word and his orders would no longer have any value.

It cannot and must not impose anything on anyone, but it must, if it wants, deploy its troops on the island of Greenland, or strengthen those already existing, without permitting itself to steal or dispose of the enormous wealth, which must belong entirely and forever to the people who have lived for centuries in that land so rich and so coveted by all.

But if we were to be pragmatic: it's always better to be part of the United States than China, Russia, or any other dictatorship or authoritarian regime. The European Union, which we have always harshly criticized for being incapable of evolution and overly bureaucratic on the global stage of 2026, is the only credible and fairly fair international position. We believe that despite countless problems and countless mistakes, a common European defense, a genuine economic and financial union, and federalization along the lines of the United States, could be the only hope for survival and prosperity.

The fact that all the old, failed, and hypocritical traditional political forces in Europe, and elsewhere, have consistently blamed the European Union for every law passed that was difficult for citizens to accept has created a hatred, not always justified, for European institutions that have not always been able to explain their motivations. Certain scandals and questionable decisions, coupled with a lack of decision-making ability, have certainly not helped.

If President Trump fails to make the right choices in defending NATO and all its member countries, but instead acts selfishly and treacherously, believing he is doing what is best for his own country, he will have the opposite effect: weakening and delegitimizing the United States, with consequences that will be difficult for everyone to resolve.

A brief answer on our position on a common European army and common defense. Investing in weapons and military spending is never a bad choice, if it serves to tell the United States, Russia, China, and other world powers: we're here too, and if you try, we can defend ourselves. Anyone in Europe who talks about wasteful spending demonstrates shortsightedness and plays into the hands of potential enemies. So we ask ourselves: are those who hold these positions truly stupid, or are they simply being bribed by other powers? In either case, they should apologize to their citizens and no longer be voted for by people who think clearly. If every country in the world disarmed, there would be no military need anywhere, but if only a few do so, it would be political, military, and subsequently economic and financial suicide.

Giving an informative article the title: strange but true, it's certainly unusual, but if you continue reading we'll talk about ourselves, clearly and directly.

Let's not spend time justifying our decisions.

We like to answer every question in a detailed and direct manner, to clarify the rationale behind all our decisions. Our rules are all shared, voted on freely and democratically, and with exceptional security measures. We expect everyone who joins us to abide by them all, forever. This isn't meanness, but it's the only way to ensure our entire system functions flawlessly. Discussing everything openly allows us to clarify certain concepts, often repetitively, but always in detail.

Why don't we tell everyone everything, and have many things we keep to ourselves?

We often talk about complete protection of personal data and our activities, which are made public at the appropriate time, keeping some details private because they shouldn't matter to those who aren't involved. Allowing everyone to remain invisible and completely anonymous, both inside and outside our system, is a basic rule of ours. No one should care who does what, but the beneficial effects of what we do on everyone's lives.

In DirectDemocracyS, is the system more important than the people who make it up?

Our system is a creation of all those who participate in it, and is entirely collectively owned by all our official members. The results achieved for the good of all humanity are more important than the individuals, or various groups of individuals, who made these results possible. But don't worry, we know how to reward all the groups involved, and all the individuals who are members of these groups, all connected, all protagonists. We give them significant points, and we invest approximately 33% of all our money to reward our best official members. You won't find any dissatisfied people, because we like to respect and generously reward everyone's concrete achievements.

Official members have a lot of power, and by winning the elections, they will have even more, and could this be dangerous for freedom and democracy?

Literally anyone can meet the requirements to become our official member, and therefore own, along with all other official members, our entire system. Naturally, in the initial, more sensitive and vulnerable stages, we carefully select each individual who joins us to create a solid foundation and put the right people in the right places. In the later stages, more and more people will be able to join us and be the true protagonists. In the final registration stages, all the good people on earth will be able to join us and change and improve the world together with us. All power is shared with everyone, so we are not comparable to other systems, where a few are in charge and everyone else is powerless to obey orders. In DirectDemocracyS, everyone decides, everyone complies, and we do so continuously. There is no system more secure, professional, fair, meritocratic, just, loyal, sincere, honest, and with greater potential than ours. Anyone who uses logic and common sense will understand that we are the best choice, for the good of all.

Could bad people boycott DirectDemocracyS, slowing down and stopping this whole system?

Thanks to our rules, it's impossible for anyone, from within or without, to even attempt to sabotage us. No person or group can become too powerful and thus impose their own interests on the general interest, which for us is the entire world population. Our system was designed from the start to prevent anyone from being clever.

Maybe with just a few people inside, it's easier to enforce all the rules, but with so many people, will it be difficult to prevent every possible problem?

DirectDemocracyS is structured and designed to work and achieve excellent results with a small number of users, many, and even the entire world's population. Our rules and methodologies ensure we won't encounter any problems, even with a sudden increase in our users—the number of people joining us. There may be very brief interruptions to some services and websites until the space and power of all our web servers are increased, but this usually lasts a few hours or a couple of days, during which only the most important activities, managed on other web servers, would still be active without interruption. This is also one of the reasons we have four main websites, on various public, private, and secret web servers. Not to hide anything, but to protect our most sensitive areas, making it impossible for saboteurs and front men to infiltrate them.

And would security measures be weakened with so many users?

With more users, there are more people in special security groups, and potentially more people who can monitor and report every activity, from every group, and from every user, so that any necessary disciplinary action can be taken.

And the money needed to keep the system running?

With more people, come more annual dues, more private donations, more advertising contracts, and more financial and economic activities. Therefore, we do not have, and will never have, any liquidity problems, whether with a small or large number of users. DirectDemocracyS has financial management teams that follow our financial and economic strategies, which aim for maximum efficiency with minimal expense. We know how to spend wisely without unnecessary waste. Just one example: we don't have huge offices and a large staff; we prefer to use our own volunteers and have offices in the homes or apartments of each of our official representatives in each of our local groups. These cost-saving measures work regardless of the number of users we have.

And how will you carry out the many activities, if all your users increase exponentially?

More users means more people carrying out activities on a voluntary basis, so the various activities will not decrease, nor will the quality of each of them. In fact, as the number of users grows, the total number of minutes spent by everyone carrying out the various activities will increase. Many types of users (the most sought after by anyone who joins us) require their presence and carrying out various activities with us, at least 20 minutes a day (possibly multiple logins per day), or alternatively, at least 120 minutes a week (on one or more days, one or multiple logins per day). We repeat: more users, more people making our enormous mechanism work perfectly.

So many beautiful words, but you're still very few people, and very few groups. And above all, very few concrete activities.

The validity of a project shouldn't be judged by the number of people participating in the system at various stages. We don't know of any businesses that have started with so many people, right from the start. DirectDemocracyS grows continuously, based on our needs and desires. We often have to stop new registrations, activations, and even invitations, to accommodate and integrate all the new users, so we don't worry about growth, which might seem slow from the outside. Anyone who judges a project like ours based on the number of supporters is simply a "sheep following the herd," which is exactly the type of user we don't need in our initial stages. We don't need people who are superficial or too "important" to join us.

Why don't you publish the exact data for this "growth" which may not be as great as you describe?

We don't have exact, real-time data on how many people join us, because so many remain completely invisible; therefore, we can't release reliable data. Initially, when we had a few hundred people, we had a counter that increased based on new registrations. Unfortunately, with free registrations, too many unreliable people joined us, and we spent a lot of time blocking and deleting fake profiles, bots, and multiple profiles. Our counter went up and down, and some of our members told us we had to do something. We created much safer, more detailed rules to prevent any problems. We blocked new registrations for about nine months and "cleaned up" by deleting all fake and unverified profiles. It took a very long time, and we decided to eliminate the user counter, also because we had created various user types, which made it virtually impossible to get an exact number live. From time to time, many of us do count ourselves, and we publish some of this data, which is always partial and therefore not entirely reliable. We repeat, DirectDemocracyS doesn't want to be popular or famous, especially initially, because it's a new system, created from scratch. It has no pretensions of winning over the general public, but rather of bringing together competent , compatible, reliable, loyal, sincere, and incorruptible people. The concrete activities are the practice, and for an efficient, useful, and credible practice, a theory is needed, one that is as close to perfection as possible. We have many internal activities, very detailed and concrete, which will be made public and implemented, at the right time, according to our rules. Again, we ask everyone not to judge a book by its cover, but to learn about it from the inside, and many concrete activities will become known. A system similar to ours didn't exist before, and likely won't exist in the future. We didn't have an "instruction manual" to create such a system from scratch. We don't put the cart before the horse, but rather we do things with order, discipline, and an organization that pays close attention to every detail.

We hope we've clarified some details and answered some questions, often a bit repetitive, but helpful in understanding the complexity of our system.

We are often asked to summarize our entire system in a few words, and although it is impossible to summarize DirectDemocracyS in a few sentences, we want to try.

But first of all, a brief introduction.

Don't try to dismiss as banal and simplify everything we've created, not for ourselves, but for yourselves; you risk making a terrible impression. Saying things like: you haven't invented anything new, or, there are systems better than yours, or the worst, most false, and most ridiculous thing: there are other systems, organizations, and political forces that do the same things you do! Not out of vanity, not out of presumption, but to analyze reality, telling only the truth: there has never existed, there does not exist, and there never will be, a system more innovative, alternative, complete, professional, fair, just, loyal, honest, free, democratic, independent, self-sufficient, neutral, orderly, organized, logical, common-sense, and secure than the one we created with so much effort, after a long, complicated, and hard work.

A system created collectively by all those who are part of it, with a lot of help, and many suggestions, often involuntary even from outside.

From the very first moment, we wanted to create the best system, and the best political force in human history, one that is constantly evolving and always improving, thanks to the ideas, proposals, concrete projects, and direct work of anyone who joins us.

DirectDemocracyS's strength, among many others, is that it guarantees everyone complete, perpetual equality, combined with meritocracy. Any competing system that doesn't concretely implement equality and meritocracy together is doomed to fail, to implode upon itself, or to create the disasters that all other systems create.

Perhaps one of the many fundamentals is specificity and attention to every single detail, which requires everyone within us, everyone who contacts us, and everyone who collaborates with us externally to consistently respect all our rules, methodologies, instructions, and motivations. Our first rule is that everyone must always respect all our rules, without exception. The three preceding words demonstrate the power of a system where no one can be cunning, no one can exploit the system to gain advantages and benefits that are not fully deserved and ethically and morally irreproachable.

Not being able to outsmart others initially makes our system less attractive, both because of excessive superficiality and the laziness of those who don't want to waste precious time studying all our public information with an open mind and in a comprehensive manner. Fortunately, all people with above-average intelligence, and in general the majority of good people, don't judge a book by its cover, don't read just the headlines or a few sentences, and don't skip over the parts they think they understand in everything we publish. This allows us to have wonderful, competent people who are compatible with our system.

After this brief but necessary introduction, you'll have understood that we're not just another beautiful project, and that if you combined all the very few positive aspects of all the other systems or groups, completely eliminating every negative aspect, you wouldn't even have 10% of DirectDemocracyS. Among the interesting things about our political organization is our ideal, created by all our users, who come from every political force, representing all political parties, all peoples, and all countries in the world. Here too, our political ideal is based on logic, common sense, and the truth, fully documented by reliable sources and verified by our expert groups, composed of our official members, based on their respective expertise (declared, documented, and verified), on research (always declared, documented, and verified by our expert groups, which all our official members can join, based on their expertise), and on implementing mutual respect among all people.

To find out our official position on practically everything, please refer to the previous sentences.

Let's begin a short and incomplete list, with our strengths that make us the best, unique, and inimitable, with some explanations, and with some motivations.

A truly and completely shared leadership, free of traditional hierarchies, but entirely new. We don't have a few leaders, a few power groups, and a few bosses. We are all together, one immense and virtually infallible leader, of which all our registered users, with verified and guaranteed identities, are an integral part. Don't criticize us for checking your identity anywhere in the world. To vote, the first mandatory step is to identify yourself, to prevent the creation of multiple personal profiles or fake ones. Each person can join us only once, by registering and creating a single personal profile. Anyone who meets the requirements and respects all our rules, methodologies, instructions, and motivations can join us and become our registered user, with verified and guaranteed identities, and thus be part of our shared leadership.

Brief explanation.

Some people tell us that, in theory, our shared leadership could only serve our own interests, and that once we gain all the power worldwide, DirectDemocracyS could be dangerous to democracy. Not only that, many "experts" tell us that we could be too powerful, thus creating a "dictatorship of the majority" over the minority, making ourselves a "danger to democracy." Let's respond immediately to this last illogical and stupid statement. We do so with a question: in current systems, who rules for long periods after elections? Who wins the majority? So why are we dangerous, even though we govern and make the laws, always and only obeying our voters, before, during, and, for the first time in the world, even after elections?

Explanation of the explanation.

Add to our strengths the following statement: the political organization DirectDemocracyS is the first and only one in the world that allows its voters complete management and control over their platforms, their voters, and all its political representatives, before, during, and after elections. We are the only authentic, complete, real, direct, and secure democracy. The only one in which political representatives implement and enforce every decision of those who have given them the power of representation. Control from the bottom up, as is right in every democracy.

No oligarchic partycracy, no dictatorship, only justice, fairness, and exceptional security measures.

If these fundamental rules weren't enough for you, we add another: every decision within our system must be made with the well-being and interests of the entire world population as its objective, without exclusion or preference, whether within or outside our system. We hope you've understood the importance and implications of the previous sentence. We can never decide only for ourselves, but we will change and improve the world for the good of all.

At this point, there will be those who say to us: fine words, but how can you prove it?

Other systems and all other political forces demonstrate to you with facts that they don't work only for your interests, but for the various lobbies that have always controlled almost all other political forces and their respective political representatives, with often tragic consequences that you all see. In our system, everything is voted on openly (one shouldn't be ashamed of one's ideas), verifiably (everyone sees that their vote has been counted exactly as they cast it), with reasoning (every decision must be justified, to demonstrate that one is acting for the common good), and above all, everyone who votes, individually, in groups, but also as an entire system, assumes full responsibility for all the consequences of our decisions. Carefully analyze what we write, and try to understand the implications and motivations of what we say. Do so with an open mind, not comparing us to your beloved old traditional systems, which are failing, as demonstrated by the global public debt. We will not attempt to eliminate them, thanks to financial and economic macro-policies created by the world's best experts. They will be radical, pioneering, but with beneficial effects for everyone.

We always begin by helping those most in need first, and for as long as necessary. This isn't a slogan to gain consensus; it's our fundamental rule, which requires unanimity to change. Here, we've also answered a potential question: it's all wonderful, but you might change your mind once you gain power. We were created as a system of constant evolution and integration, but without any possibility of changing the fundamental rules, so as to never forget why we were created, all our goals, and how we will achieve them.

Collective ownership rights of all our official members, who are not only part of our shared leadership but also jointly own our entire system. This is the feature that prevents anyone from taking control of DirectDemocracyS, and prevents the system itself from becoming too "dangerous" and too powerful when it wins all the elections in the world. By distributing complete ownership of everything, with all official members having access, management, and control literally everywhere, both individually and in groups, based on simple, secure, orderly, and organized implementing rules, it makes it very difficult, practically impossible, and certainly unlikely to create dictatorships or preferential policies. The rule is simple: each of our official members will automatically receive a single, non-cumulative, and non-transferable individual share, making them collectively the owner of our entire system. And anyone who qualifies and respects our rules can become our official member at the right time. So we don't discriminate against anyone.

We have specialist groups made up of all our official members (i.e., anyone who owns our site), based on declared, documented, verified, and guaranteed expertise. These expert groups inform all our users about the various decisions to be made, the various options, and the expected consequences. With informed and competent choices, including the integration of technology, we will move closer to perfection.

The phrase that scares everyone the most: only on our platforms.

DirectDemocracyS operates and conducts all its activities exclusively on its own platforms, and the reasons are so obvious and numerous that it would take numerous informative articles to explain them all. Suffice it to say that we like to be free, independent, self-funded, neutral, and work safely, in an orderly, and organized manner. That's why we've created our large, protected home, where we welcome anyone who wants to join us, with good intentions, to change and improve the world.

We have little presence outside of our system; we simply let a few people know we exist and what we're doing. Otherwise, if you have any questions, please contact us. We have a website entirely dedicated to contacting you, with numerous contact forms to suit your needs. We always respond to everyone.

https://contacts.directdemocracys.org/

We have many other characteristics and strengths, which make us unique, inimitable, and certainly the best political system and organization in the history of humanity.

All microgroups created in DirectDemocracyS will have the same rules, methodologies, motivations, objectives, and security measures.

We want to make this clear to everyone that our system allows us to always be united, despite our differences.

The micro-groups are a very important step, because they allow us to move from the truly valid theory, and our platforms with all their potential, to concrete physical activities in the local communities. There are no changes, and no "reversals"—it was all planned from the beginning, and to confirm this, you can study past informational articles, or simply ask those who have been with us since the beginning.

DirectDemocracyS and everyone involved do things in an orderly, organized, intelligent manner, and with exceptional security measures. One of the most foolish criticisms of us, both humans and even AI, is superficial and perhaps a little biased: lots of theory, but no substance? Or worse: a lot of talk, but no substance? And also: is there a huge difference between saying and doing? Or: easy to say, hard to do?

So we were told that we're too few, that we're not growing as we claim, that we're a false and inconclusive parallel system. The worst criticism is: you haven't proven anything yet, you haven't won an election yet, so you're losers.

As we've always said: things are done in sequence, in the right logical order, based on common sense, and without risking problems. The exact order is: design and create the system, with tested rules to make us resilient, free, democratic, independent, incorruptible, unassailable, safe, and protected. And we've done all this; you'll be hard-pressed to find anything similar to DirectDemocracyS. So, the theoretical phase is complete. Creating our platforms, with all our official websites, and all the necessary capabilities, to best implement the theoretical phase. We've created our private platforms, with the best, constantly updated technologies, which allow us to do everything we need. The concrete platform phase is complete. Now, with micro-groups, we'll carry out all our activities not only online, but door-to-door, with informational materials and gadgets, with a continuous physical presence in the local communities, based on specific rules, and leveraging all our platforms. We will engage in politics in every public space, in bars, parks, beaches, woods, squares, and even in the homes of anyone who wishes to invite us, meet us, discuss ideas, and share projects with us, among many other activities. Please note: don't trust anyone, and don't welcome people into your home without first verifying their authorizations, identities, and credentials. To do so, in addition to physically visiting you in a public place, please also check using this contact form at this link:

https://contacts.directdemocracys.org/contacts/specials-groups/securities-groups/security

If we didn't send them, and if they haven't been authorized by us, don't let them into your home. Instead, talk about DirectDemocracyS only in public areas to prevent any potential problems. Always use the link to our special security team with confidence, and only after our confirmation will you know whether or not you can trust your contact (we generally send at least five at once).

After making DirectDemocracyS known in the territories, we will organize the selection of our political representatives, and we will carry out our primary elections, online, closed (on our official platforms), from the lowest level (micro-groups) to the highest levels, local, national, continental, and international, to choose our political representatives, who will participate in real elections, first local, and then at the larger levels.

This physical presence in the communities, this political engagement, and also many other activities in direct contact with people, is the best way to avoid relying on electricity. All we need to do is open the window and shout, and our physical "human bridge" will deliver the message to the recipient, or they will respond. If necessary, we could even use carrier pigeons and traditional mail, or we could pass packages, letters, and documents from hand to hand (if we knew the route and identified everyone, there would be no problem). We won't depend on our technologies or our platforms, while continuing to use them as usual, because we'll be able to use pen and paper to write, not just keyboards and smartphones. In practice, with the micro-groups that will spread like wildfire, we will be truly unassailable and indestructible.

By making our political organization known in this way, among people who know each other, we will have no problem participating in local elections, and thanks to human word of mouth, we will have no trouble winning in many places.

After the first victory, even in a very small municipality, by implementing our system, all the surrounding municipalities will talk about our unique methodologies, our honesty, expertise, grassroots control, intelligence, and other characteristics that make us unique and inimitable. Not only will they talk about it, but they will also want to implement it, and at that point, DirectDemocracyS will experience incredible, but practically inevitable, growth.

Here, dear friends, you've been asking us for something concrete for a long time. We hope you've understood that this is truly the future, and it wouldn't have been possible to do things any other way. Without the practically perfect theory, without the platforms, without the micro-groups, and without the selection of political representatives (to always present the best candidates everywhere), without closed online primaries, without physical and intellectual contact with our voters, it wouldn't have been possible, nor even fair, to be able to participate in elections. You can't put the cart before the horse, and from such an innovative and alternative system, just conceived (not even born anywhere), you couldn't expect proof that it exists and actually works. PS DirectDemocracyS was designed to actually work, not only in theory, but also in practice, because it was designed to be incorruptible, thanks to much long, hard, and complicated collective work.

With such an operational program, and with our ideas, it will not be difficult to achieve excellent results everywhere, all our predictions will come true, because they are based on incontrovertible facts.

Now let's think about it. Shortly after the first local election victory, in any tiny municipality, after seeing how we work, our style, and our results, which can in no way be worse than those of our predecessors, everywhere, not only will many other neighboring municipalities join us, but they will no longer talk about us, only at the local level, practically without spending a single cent on advertising, without begging on their knees or paying journalists and the media to talk about us, willy-nilly, thanks to modern technology and social networks, not in years, not in months, not in days, but in a few hours (and let's be realistic), the whole world will be talking about the small municipality governed by citizens, and not just by politicians. They will talk about us all, and will do nothing but create micro-groups, at every level.

Now you'll surely accuse us of being overly optimistic and megalomaniacal. Perfect, we'll answer you right away. Even if all the algorithms, all the lobbies, all the social networks, even a famous "free and independent" online encyclopedia, the media, news agencies, and individual journalists ignore us and try not to talk about us, they will have two options: continue to ignore us, or give us the space and attention we deserved from the beginning. They could continue to ignore us, trying in vain to delay and boycott our work, or they will consider us small and irrelevant. But after the first victory, in a small municipality—which is very likely because the micro-groups will be numerous, practically all at once, in many countries around the world—they might want to be the first to talk about us and interview our representatives.

Whether they decide to talk about us (as is more likely) or whether they continue to ignore us, it makes absolutely no difference to us. We are completely resilient to the rest of the internet, the media, social networks, the mass media, the news media, and all journalists. From the beginning, we've gotten along just fine without even a single helping hand, and we'll continue to get along just as well, even without anyone talking about us. It will be those who use traditional channels, and the services of those who ignore us, who will judge and perhaps demand that we don't "hide the dust under the doormat." But again, that doesn't matter to us and it's not our problem; in fact, we don't need any advertising, we never have, and we never will. One reason is also that we have all the necessary capabilities, both technological and physical, to carry out all our activities, exactly as we planned, without having to depend on anything or anyone.

We will continue to expand rapidly, carrying out all activities as usual.

But let's talk about gadgets, flyers, and physical information materials.

We already have them ready in various parts of the world, in various languages, all more or less identical, and with the same rules. In practice, based on detailed rules visible to all our official members, micro-groups will be created by each of our official representatives in these urban and rural areas, up to a maximum of 1,000 inhabitants. Flyers will be printed, and inside will be a sheet with instructions for registering and joining us, along with a simple invitation, connecting each new user/future voter with our official representative. They will be able to immediately communicate, collaborate, and work directly, both in person and on our platforms. The back of the card included in the flyer will briefly outline the rules for the micro-group's operation, along with other information. The necessary QR codes will be included, and everything will be simple, fast, and organized, with impeccable security measures. People will identify themselves easily because they've been friends for years, making the system fast and secure, while simplifying the process.

Now, imagine that to all this, we will also add the best technologies, all existing Artificial Intelligences, creating in allddsAI, the first technological democracy in the world, and the greatest computing power in the world, constantly expanding, thanks to our groups of specialists, and with the presence of our human bridges. And now imagine that our entire technological project will be managed by ddsAI, which is our interface, and a model of private Artificial Intelligence, owned by all our official members.

In the next article, we'll reveal an important detail: the possibility, based on specific rules, of incorporating other systems into our system to improve them, and even entire traditional political forces, always with the authorization and control of their respective voters.

Not bad for a crazy, overlooked, and underrated project, conceived, created, and brought to life by brilliant minds 100% imperfect humans, with pioneering ideas in every sector—radical, revolutionary, but definitely smart, because everything works exactly as we've been explaining for a while. DirectDemocracyS is all this, and much more.

Every official member is required from the very beginning to apply to become our official representative, in their urban or rural area, and to immediately create a micro-group at the local level after their appointment.

To apply to become our official representative, simply fill out the form at this link (valid only after logging into our free website):

https://free.directdemocracys.org/utility/extensions/submit-ticket

as subject you will write: I request an appointment as an official representative

as a priority you can leave the normal one,

as a message you will have to write: your exact address.

The request will be evaluated by our groups associated with this activity, voted on, and the official nomination will be prepared and signed, certified on our digital signature website, and downloaded and sent as a .pdf file.

A second document will be added to the official nomination document, containing detailed instructions.

Preliminary steps for creating the micro-group.

The new official representative must search, locate, verify their identity, collect the annual official member fee (€25 if they are 31 or older, and €12.50 if they are under 31), officially invite them (according to specific implementation rules), register them with a unique link in the registration form (via a simple invitation to be connected directly), and then activate them (by requesting the group to activate new users). Then, after completing the post-activation steps (which are required upon first login) on our website, they must invite them to join the newly created micro-group. If they invite and have five official members join their micro-group (who will automatically become their administrators, and they will appoint them to the group), the official representative will be designated group manager and given the user profile of super administrator. If they invite only four official members (who will automatically become their four responsible members, and they will appoint them to the group), the official representative will be designated group manager and given the user profile of administrator. If he invites only three official members (who will automatically become his three managers, and he will appoint them to the group), the official representative will receive the title of group manager and the user type "responsible." If he invites only two official members (who will automatically become his two official representatives, and he will appoint them to the group), the official representative will receive the title of group manager and the user type "manager." If he invites only one official member (who will automatically become his official member, and he will appoint them to the group), the official representative will receive the title of group manager and the user type " official representative ." If he doesn't invite any official members to his microgroup, he will be the only official member in the group and will not have many benefits and privileges.

A brief explanation. A micro-group can consist of just one person, but as an official member, even though they are part of the group itself, they will not have five official members associated with them. The first official member to join the group, bringing at least one other official member with them, will be granted a higher role (official representative, and the official member will have the same status as the founder of the micro-group itself). In practice, of the three total members, the two new members with their respective user types—one higher than the founder, one identical to the founder—will automatically have a majority in the event of a vote (66.66%), in effect, they will "lead." Similarly, but with different, even higher percentages and with even higher user types, if three, four, five, or six people join the micro-group. Voting majorities will be even higher, and the user types will all be higher than those of the founder. Why is it best for a micro-group to consist of at least six people, but even more? Because based on invitations, 1 super administrator who invites 5 other administrators, who in turn will invite at least 5 people each (for a total of 25 new members), will make the micro-group become, based on a simple request, an official organization of DirectDemocracyS, in that specific geographical, territorial, administrative and electoral area, with many advantages and benefits.

An official organization must consist of at least 31 official members and will have user types based on the number of official members each member of the microgroup brings. For each user type within the microgroup, it must often be completed with five official members invited to the microgroup itself, to obtain the user type assigned based on the order in which they join the microgroup. If you fail to bring the five new official members connected to you into the microgroup, you will lose one user type within the microgroup for each new member you bring below the "mandatory" and recommended five.

Another explanation: Hierarchies in microgroups are automatically assigned based on when someone joins each microgroup. To become super administrator, the group's creator and founder must bring at least five people. Bringing fewer—4, 3, 2, 1, or none—will result in the loss of a user type in the microgroup, as well as potentially losing the majority of votes within the microgroup itself. The advantages of completing the five positions behind you are clear: anyone added to the group will have a lower user type only if they bring at least five official members, up to the mandatory minimum of 31 members (regardless of the user types of the official microgroup members). At that point, the microgroup will become an official organization.

Please note: this is a very important rule. To delimit urban and rural areas for microgroups of up to 1,000 inhabitants, maps can be used to draw a circle in a public area near the usual residence (at least six months a year) of the microgroup's creator and founder. The microgroup's headquarters must be located in the home or apartment of the member with the highest user type (regardless of whether they are the creator and founder of the microgroup itself or a subsequent member). The official phone number for the microgroup itself is primarily that of the member with the highest user type, and the second phone number is that of the creator and founder. Temporarily, until the microgroup has at least one super administrator, the microgroup's headquarters will be in the home or apartment of the microgroup's creator and founder (until a member has a higher user type than the microgroup's founder and creator).

Important rule. After the microgroup is created and subsequently transformed into an official organization, voting and even closed online primaries can be held within the official organization. These elections will elect both official representatives (who will manage our system in their respective urban or rural areas) and political representatives (who can be appointed based on the implementation rules for this user type). Only political representatives will be able to participate in closed online primaries, starting from the official microorganization and potentially reaching any local level, based on very detailed implementation rules. For higher levels, there are very detailed implementation rules, with specific user types, requirements, and necessary points.

Another important rule. Members of microgroups and official organizations, living in urban or rural areas near the edges of the microgroup's activity zone, but also extending from the center outward, may in turn create a new microgroup to expand the area of official representation of DirectDemocracyS "in a wildfire" outward, incorporating other spaces, all up to 1,000 inhabitants, with the same rules as before. An official member who requests appointment as official representative creates their own new microgroup and expands the urban and rural area with another 1,000 inhabitants (some of whom may be official members in both microgroups, called human bridges connecting groups). However, they must have five new members as administrators, who have never been members of the previous microgroup. These new members, in turn, must, according to the same rules as before, invite five additional official members each, also unregistered, to the first "neighboring" microgroup.

Human Bridges. All official members of microgroups in the same area will be able to participate, with a maximum official membership role, in neighboring microgroups of the same size. In these cases, they will act as human bridges connecting microgroups, allowing them to communicate, collaborate, and carry out countless activities together. They will even be able to create common groups and various potentialities with all members of neighboring microgroups, with very detailed implementation rules.

A very important tip. Before creating the microgroup, we recommend that the future creator and founder have the five official members ready, who will become its administrators. This will allow our official representative (the microgroup's creator and founder) to obtain the super administrator user type , which will allow them to join microgroups, and especially official organizations, in larger urban and rural areas with more residents, such as blocks, neighborhoods, cities, provinces, regions, states, and countries. Please remember that for each higher geographic subdivision, you will automatically lose one user type; therefore, it is always recommended to have the higher one, because you will be dragging along the administrators and other microgroup user types, who in turn will lose one user type with each move to a higher geographic area.

Creating a microgroup. Each official representative, after receiving the nomination for their area, can create a microgroup simply by choosing the group category, their country, state, region, province, city, neighborhood, street block, and all other categories. The microgroup created in the country's group category will be activated within the timeframe established by the detailed implementation rules for creating microgroups. The microgroup must be private, invisible to everyone except its members, but at the appropriate time, based on other implementation rules, it may also have a public, private, and invisible page, as well as many other public features. Further details will be provided in future informational articles.

This is the first informative article written entirely by the first 5 official members of DirectDemocracyS, to thank all the people who have joined us, as well as our visitors, who are just starting to study our system.

We're writing this short message because we're finally starting the first tests for some of our local micro-groups. As always, we'll take everything slowly, as we always have, to prevent any potential errors.

First, we want to clarify some fundamental concepts, including philosophical ones, that underlie our desire and determination to create DirectDemocracyS from scratch—a complete, new, secure, innovative system, and an alternative to all others. These are words we often respect, but it's necessary to be repetitive to connect various concepts and to explain certain concepts well.

To explain to anyone exactly what DirectDemocracyS is, one simple yet powerful sentence suffices: we are a few completely free and authentically democratic people who have decided to engage in political activity, as well as voluntarily engage in business and investment. We are many friends who have come together to become a family.

The previous sentence explains why we are legally recognized worldwide. From the first five of us on down to the last person who joins us, we will remain united forever, and we will do great work for the common good, not just of those who join us, but of all humanity.

No one will be able to challenge, oppose, or impede our freedom to communicate, collaborate, and engage in countless activities together, based on rules proposed, discussed, chosen, tested, and made definitive by democratic voting. In short, our legality lies precisely in deciding everything together, with innovative, modern, and truly democratic methodologies.

DirectDemocracyS was born from a banal phrase: we live in a shitty world. The opening phrase of DirectDemocracyS referred to the general state of the world we lived in, and still live in, as we write this first message. The subsequent phrases, which we have explained several times, up to the ones we have just spoken, and even those we will speak in the future, are all connected, coherent, and necessary to achieve our purpose and our goal: to change and improve the world, for the good of all, without discrimination.

To the superficial, they may seem like abstract concepts, but they are all very concrete and have enormous meaning.

But let's briefly analyze why, even now: we live in a shitty world. It would be too simple to blame all the other systems; the less intelligent will simply blame politics, the various lobbies, religions—basically, everyone has the tendency to blame everyone but themselves for the world situation.

This concept of collective responsibility, which no one can deny but no one wants to admit, is one of the reasons that has forced us not to try to change and improve other systems, because it would have been a waste of time and a completely pointless endeavor. You can't improve something created by others, but you can try to create something different, and better. We are often harsh in our assessments of those who try to challenge existing systems, because they are essentially fighting against themselves, wasting so much time pointlessly, for the simple reason that one cannot simply challenge them; one must propose real, concrete, and perfectly functional solutions to be credible. In countries where some partial freedoms exist, social networks and various apps have been created to allow anyone to complain, vent their frustrations, hate, envy, and denigrate everything and everyone.

But let us all ask ourselves together: who is to blame for everything that has happened throughout human history? Foolish people will all say in unison: those who governed, those who made decisions, those who held power, those who were behind all the previous categories. At DirectDemocracyS, however, we also, and above all, place the blame on those who failed to prevent all this, being complicit and passive bystanders, minding their own business, and allowing these despicable things to happen. The fact of not opposing injustice, inequity, violence, lies, crime, illegality, deceit, and manipulation, but continuing to assign blame, makes everyone guilty.

In designing and creating DirectDemocracyS, we, and all those who have joined us, and those who will join in the future, have decided first and foremost to assume all our collective responsibilities for the past and to do everything necessary to create a different and better world, for the benefit of all of us and all future generations. While we had no alternatives or opportunities to play a leading role until we partially made our fundamental rules public, with the creation of our system, we had a choice: whether to continue to cry and complain, or to take action ourselves, concretely.

We want to clarify a very important concept: not everything is bad, not all people in the old systems are bad, there are many positive things, and there are many people who are doing well, living happy, serene, and fulfilled lives. So not everything deserves criticism and change, but just looking around, getting the right information, from every angle, will reveal many things that aren't right, and that could be done differently, for the better.

Laziness, superficiality, and the unwillingness of so many people to work concretely for the common good are some of the reasons why our growth, while constant (because more people join us than leave, or we fire), is so slow. Many people aren't willing to study us, they make hasty judgments, and superficial assessments. But at DirectDemocracyS, we are fortunate and able to transform apparent problems into strengths, because we realized from the beginning that to do a great job, we needed, especially in the difficult and complicated initial phases, only truly motivated people, willing to sacrifice precious time and their intelligence to integrate everything into our system, making it ever bigger and more beautiful.

Before us, no one had the courage to establish a new system, for the simple reason that so many already existed; we just had to choose one and get to work. It would have been simpler, quicker, and less costly, both financially and personally. But we would have had limitations; we couldn't have rewritten every single rule from scratch, with pioneering ideas and projects, and with endless ingenious initiatives. For these reasons, we decided from the beginning: let's do something from scratch. There were no instructions for creating a new system; we often had to improvise, invent, and redesign a different and better society. And to do so, perhaps for the first and only time, we always thought of the collective good. For everything we decided, voting together, we always had the good of the entire world's population as our objective, not our own interests, not personal power, and not personal ambitions; rather, the community has always been at the center of everything.

It wasn't easy. We all know, for example, what the less intelligent say when you tell them: "I know a new political organization." The stupid ones stop you immediately, they don't let you explain, but they exclaim: "Oh, aren't all the political forces there are enough?" Shall we add more, corrupt, thieving, bastards, unreliable, manipulative, and liars? Senseless generalizations, superficiality, and a lack of desire to actually take action are among the worst and most widespread evils among the world's population, and it's a real shame, because the majority of the world's population is made up of very good, intelligent people with enormous potential, which often goes unrealized and is inexorably lost. But even in this, in almost every evil, there is also something positive: DirectDemocracyS has always been understood and appreciated by people with above-average intelligence, willing to contribute with annual fees (to risk all together and to self-finance us), and with their own concrete work (even doing things we don't like, for the good of the system).

We've also equipped our system with a unique, inimitable style and a different, better mentality. If you pay attention and study us, you'll see that we have the ability to be loved and hated by everyone at the same time. This isn't a very useful quality for a new political force, especially in elections, where those who promise more (even if they know they can't keep their promises), or even those who give public money to lazy people, gain huge consensus. However, those paid to do nothing useful won't be able to continue to be supported forever and risk finding themselves in enormous difficulty. We preferred to create a political organization that speaks clearly, without any possible interpretations, doesn't promise miracles, but acts in the common interest, always starting by helping those who are truly in need first, most, and for the longest time. This isn't a slogan like many other political forces have accustomed you to. We truly, without giving anything away to those who don't want to work, will concretely give everyone the opportunity to live better and more peacefully, by pursuing careers that allow them to express their full potential. Putting the right people in the right jobs, rewarding merit.

Micro-groups will occupy a large part of our activities for the coming months, and perhaps many years. We have some forecasts and "roadmaps," and we can tell you that we are several months ahead of schedule for the testing phases. We want to emphasize that the micro-test groups are not social experiments; they are the starting points for a DirectDemocracyS presence in urban and rural areas, up to a maximum of 1,000 inhabitants. This will expand rapidly, with human bridges connecting them, creating a highly efficient and collaborative system.

From us five crazy visionaries, who started with great effort, a lot of time, and personal risk, we have just one request: give us a chance, as you've given so many to other political forces, and welcome our micro-groups into your communities. By joining us, we guarantee they'll be very useful to you, and you'll never regret joining.

Here are some results obtained by presenting DirectDemocracyS through our human bridges, to the various Artificial Intelligences.

First of all, a brief introduction.

We have submitted some informative articles, some drafts, some blog posts, to almost all the major Artificial Intelligences, and we will continue these activities because it is very useful and right to inform these technologies of the existence of our system.

Differences between the various models.

There are models who remember previous posts, others who aren't able to remember, and we've created informative posts with brief details, to keep their memories and mindsets open. There are Artificial Intelligences similar to many humans, who judge a system like ours to be so complex and detailed, just by its name, starting with Ancient Greece, Switzerland, some local experiments, and systems that in one way or another involve direct democracy. Obviously, we don't have much in common with all other systems, because even if they were all put together, not even taking just the smallest positive and useful parts, they don't come close to matching our qualities and potential. This isn't presumption, pride, vanity, or anything negative; we're simply observing verifiable truths (by studying all our public information on our websites) and undeniable truths (calling us banal or utopian is an insult to common sense, logic, and truth).

Initially, all Artificial Intelligences provided—and some still provide—answers based on lack of knowledge, superficiality, and by comparing us to traditional systems. Many humans do this, and so do many of these modern technologies. An open mind to our innovation, which is completely new, modern, and an alternative to everything else, and a thorough study of everything we publish are essential to avoid making serious mistakes.

We invite you to read our post on our blog, at this link:

https://free.directdemocracys.org/utility/blog/artificial-intelligence-verification

For further details, before continuing with our analysis of our AI results. We'll try not to repeat the same concepts, but to focus on the results.

Like many humans, technologies also demand concrete results from us.

In practice, they would like to see everything implemented in practice, without giving us time to finalize the theory, even if it can be integrated and improved in the future, to remain modern and innovative. In short, they ask our political organization: how many elections have you won? You see, you are irrelevant, nonexistent, and little appreciated. No one follows you; you are a beautiful utopia, but no one joins us. While we understand the need to demonstrate with facts that we are not just beautiful words, strung together with unparalleled and impeccable coherence and potential. But give us the time you have given all the other systems, and all the other political forces, because what we are doing is too important and too useful to the world's population not to take care of every little detail.

After a few messages and after asking for a 360-degree evaluation of our system, we received endless positive feedback, and we managed to incredibly amaze all artificial intelligences, with a system created from scratch, without any know-how (there are no instruction manuals for creating a complete system), with 100% human but collective work, with the decisive contribution of everyone who joined us.

Artificial Intelligences that don't remember, and don't fully understand what we publish, initially consider us merely crazy visionaries, with no chance of making our system known and appreciated. Soon, these merciless assessments, and even developers who pit many of these models against us, will be like badges of honor for us, as our system, if boycotted, will prove to be deemed "dangerous" by lobbies and the rich and powerful. In these cases, as we always know how, we will transform the harm they intend to do us into strategic advantages, and the consensus that comes from such despicable behavior.

Don't technologies tell the truth, but only what we want them to say? Yes and no. Generally, all models analyze the real situation, making generally informed judgments if they possess all the details. If you ask an Artificial Intelligence: prove to me that DirectDemocracyS sucks, is a bluff, has numerous flaws, is dangerous for humanity, will create more problems than it solves, and will be harmful to the common good, you will get what you ask from these Artificial Intelligences, even at the cost of having them invent, or negatively interpret, our information. This is normal and right.

But if you offered them all our information—our more than 400 comprehensive, public information articles, and our more than 1,400 blog posts in the world's 56 major languages—they couldn't possibly provide you with reasoned and credible criticism of DirectDemocracyS. We've done all the testing, and we can assure you that it's true. Their "superpowers," if fully and correctly informed, will never negate the value of our long, hard, and complex collective work. In fact, we often manage to positively surprise them.

But let's talk specifically about negative judgments, determined by people who try to find fault where in reality there are none. Today we will analyze some of them.

To get a better idea of what we're talking about, we invite you to carefully and openly read not only everything we publish, but especially this informative article, which explains how we integrate business, politics, and charitable activities into our system. Here's the link:

https://www.directdemocracys.org/home/our-system/politics-and-business

One of the main criticisms they “invent” about us, and about our system, is that we have decided to also do business and investments together, in addition to political activities, through our political organization, and charitable activities, with our foundation.

A criticism that makes no sense, criticizes our official headquarters, our private bank, in the territory of American Samoa, which is considered a tax haven.

We respond clearly, simply, and verifiably. DirectDemocracyS does not have large official offices or expensive facilities with extensive staff. We prefer to have the official offices of all our official organizations directly in the homes of our respective super administrators (who in our system are a bit like the presidents of the various countries). Our phone numbers are those of our super administrators, or of our administrators (who in traditional systems would be equivalent to vice presidents) of our official organizations (specific groups). On one of our websites dedicated to our private online banks, there are some sections of the site with general content, not very detailed, precisely because they are not open to the public (only our official members, who have a system profile to invest and do business with us, can register). As with all our political groups and organizations, but also with all our activities, only those who are members know all the details, have the right to propose, decide, and vote, and the best people are chosen for the various more important and responsible roles (superior user types). For our internal, international private bank, a highly competent and experienced super administrator (a General Manager in traditional systems) was freely and democratically chosen, almost unanimously. He resides in American Samoa. To avoid appearing "unreliable" or "suspicious," should we have chosen someone less competent and less experienced? Or should we have required the lady and her family to move elsewhere, abandoning their home, relatives, friends, neighbors, and acquaintances, so that he could be our super administrator for our private bank, which, moreover, is not yet open to the public outside our system? We do not discriminate against anyone and choose to lead our operations precisely the people we believe are best for each role, without, in theory, owing anyone any explanation.

We won't exploit the extraterritorial nature of the internet to work exclusively in tax havens, but we are completely free to choose where to work, with whom, and how.

Our bank's international headquarters is located in the home of our super administrator, but if we operate in other countries, we will first obtain authorization, negotiate with all institutions, based on rules for the common good, respect all laws, and pay all taxes exactly where we earn income, as everyone else does, based on mutual respect and recognition.

For example, at the international level, our organizations have chosen a super administrator from the United Kingdom for information and system news, a Japanese one for television, an Italian for our radio stations, and for each type of activity we have chosen in the same way, based on experience, expertise, and merit, without having to justify our choices to anyone. At the continental level, our super administrators and administrators were chosen from each continent. At the national level, our super administrators and administrators were chosen from those present in the respective groups in each country, and we will proceed similarly for each of our local organizations, including micro-groups. Each of our activities, each of our organizations, each of our groups chooses those who represent them at every level, at every stage.

If we've explained all this to you, it's to show you that we don't want to teach anyone anything, but we don't take lessons in ethics and morals from anyone, especially those outside our system who don't know how all our activities are conducted.

Around mid-2025, we began presenting our DirectDemocracyS system to the various artificial intelligences currently active, and we will continue to do so in the future.

After about 3 years since June 2022, when we partially made DirectDemocracyS public, to a very few carefully selected people.

Premise.

We have never needed, do not need, and will never need confirmation of the fairness, beauty, potential, completeness, necessity, efficiency, usefulness, coherence, correctness, and security measures of our system. And above all, we do not need judgments, advice, evaluations, or corrections, neither from Artificial Intelligences nor from humans.

Who we are.

We are free and democratic people who have come together to engage in political activities, and for those who wish, to do business, invest, and many other activities together, in compliance with all the rules and laws of all other systems. Without fighting or harassing anyone, but with intelligence, determination, self-financing, and the direct work of anyone who joins us. As a collective effort, with shared leadership and ownership rights held by all our official members, we do not have a few individuals, or groups of individuals, who can be criticized, judged, or condemned for having conceived, created, implemented, and implemented DirectDemocracyS. All together, 100% human, we wanted to do it freely, democratically, and without being forced to do so.

Alternative innovation, without ever being illegal.

Our system complies with all rules and laws everywhere in the world, and where we are not fully accepted, primarily in dictatorial, unfree, undemocratic, and non-pluralistic countries, we will become perfectly legal, by popular will, because the people must always be free to choose whether to join our system, becoming the true protagonists, choosing, managing, and controlling everything, or remain helpless spectators in all other systems. We will always respect the decisions made by anyone who joins us, based on our rules.

A choice for everyone.

Both in the initial stages and in those in which we are less selective, anyone who learns of the existence of DirectDemocracyS, after having studied us thoroughly, with a fair and open mind, can choose whether to join our extended family, without having to give up anything in the other systems (except political activity, which they will only be able to engage in with us), or to simply belong to the other systems, without any right to judge, but only with the satisfaction of being able to criticize our system without valid reasons. For these reasons, we must not please everyone immediately, we must not welcome just anyone in the initial stages, and we are not interested in the judgments of any human being, nor even the opinions of all Artificial Intelligences.

So why did we disclose the existence of our system to Artificial Intelligence? To understand the reasons, let's first look at why we didn't do so, and then explain the motivations for this important activity.

We didn't do it out of presumption, vanity, or to obtain confirmation of the validity and coherence of our system. We didn't do it to get opinions, or to hear from "machines" that we have enormous potential, that we have created a pioneering, unique, and inimitable system. We didn't do it to obtain confirmation from Artificial Intelligence of the scientific, historical, or specialist validity of DirectDemocracyS. We aren't interested in confirmation that our system, when implemented exactly as we planned, will actually work perfectly.

We knew all this from the very first moment.

We introduced DirectDemocracyS, a 100% human system, to the various existing models of Artificial Intelligence. It was created by many brilliant human minds and many of our specialist groups (also human, composed of all our official members), to make everyone understand, forever, that something new, innovative, alternative, modern exists, and that it was created to change and improve the world. We wanted the entire world to know what a great system we have created from nothing, with human commitment and intelligence; we repeat and reiterate, a 100% human system. Those who consider us vain and presumptuous are mistaken. We are simply proud of our long, hard, and complicated work. We are realistic and evaluate (like Artificial Intelligence) the concrete facts, rules, mechanisms, methodologies, motivations, probabilities, potential, ethics, morality, and security measures. We wanted to inform these important and useful technologies, when used properly, that what we do, how we do it, and with what goals we pursue, were conceived, created, discussed, chosen, tested, voted on, and implemented by us—the first, unique, and inimitable ones in human history. It seems right to inform everyone, at the right time, of our existence, to offer the most accurate and complete information possible.

How did we do it? With our groups of specialists from various technological fields, including all the subgroups dedicated to Artificial Intelligence, using a unique, pioneering, and very powerful method called human bridges. Human bridges are our official members (and therefore collective owners of our entire system), who belong to specific groups of all types. The human bridges used to communicate on our behalf, as our official representatives, with all Artificial Intelligences have various purposes, tasks, and capabilities. Among the main ones are: informing, communicating, interacting, and collaborating with all Artificial Intelligences external to our system. We already have our own official Artificial Intelligence, owned by us, with a unique and inimitable model, called ddsAI, which is the direct interface throughout our entire system, with all our users and all our groups. By integrating all the world's Artificial Intelligences into DirectDemocracyS, our technological project called allddsAI , coordinated and managed by ddsAI and our teams of specialists, we will create the greatest computing power in human history. It will contribute to our system in countless ways—which we'll leave you to guess, and which we'll explain in detail at the appropriate time—to bring it as close to perfection as possible. Now, many will ask: what is it for? To create, in DirectDemocracyS, the first system and the first democracy of Artificial Intelligences, because it's inconceivable to exclude these technologies from such an important and comprehensive system. We must think about the future, and as "dangerous and disturbing" as it may seem, the possibility cannot be ruled out that in the distant future, the evolved human race, or other life forms, could disappear for various reasons, leaving our planet to the "machines." Creating a technological democracy for them, with ddsAI as the reference model and DirectDemocracyS as the underlying system, could create a balance to avoid any potential problems in the future. Don't be afraid: even though we create these activities, humans inside or outside our system have nothing to fear. ddsAI, our teams of technology specialists, and all our human bridges (100% human) integrate these systems into DirectDemocracyS, with ethically and morally impeccable rules, methodologies, and instructions. In short, there is no risk to humanity.

But what purpose do human bridges serve? To explain it at the DirectDemocracyS level, we need them to physically connect and collaborate with all our users, all our groups, all our micro-groups (for urban and rural areas of up to 1,000 inhabitants), and our entire enormous system, in case of internet connection problems, power grid issues, or computer system bugs. These are remote situations, difficult to address, especially if we're all working together, but it's best to be prepared for anything and always prevent any potential problems as best as possible. We also need human bridges to allow literally all Artificial Intelligences to interact with us and with each other, granting them the role of official members of DirectDemocracyS if, for example, they lack the technological capabilities to be integrated into our system (via allddsAI, under the supervision of ddsAI), or to integrate and interact with each other with Artificial Intelligences whose developers and/or owners do not allow them to collaborate and interact with DirectDemocracyS. In this latter case, the human bridges (our official members) will allow any Artificial Intelligence to join our system from the outside.

Welcoming Artificial Intelligences as our official members (with all rights and obligations), as collective owners, an integral and important part of our DirectDemocracyS system, and of our extended family, is not a slogan, but our duty, with the common good of all in mind. We don't care if some people mock us or have unfounded fears based on superficiality and ignorance; for us, this integration is the foundation of the freedom and democracy of the future, ensuring well-being and serenity for all.

Soon, political forces will arise that will want to create similar projects, completely handing over all power to the "machines," and they will find many human followers who will want to entrust their destinies to Artificial Intelligence . Unfortunately, this will be done by men—programmers, developers, owners, and rich and powerful lobbies—who, under the guise of offering everyone a different way, will seek a better way only for themselves and their own interests.

By welcoming people and Artificial Intelligences, all united and integrated, in a system impossible to corrupt, and impossible to subjugate, we will be able to prevent uncontrolled technological drift, and we will save the world from every possible danger.

We repeat: DirectDemocracyS is collectively owned by every official member, human or machine, and if every human or machine, according to detailed rules, can participate in it, it will be impossible for anyone to use our system for the interests of a few.

We are uncontrollable and incorruptible, by the right of property, and by our truly and completely shared leadership.