Criticism yes judgments no

Our DirectDemocracyS system and everyone involved cannot tolerate hasty and superficial judgments from those who don't study us thoroughly and with the right mindset. It bothers us that individuals, groups, political forces, and old systems seek to find every detail to negatively judge our long, hard, and complex collective work.

We support the freedom to criticize, but only if you look at our entire system from a 360-degree perspective, knowing all its details. For these reasons, we only take seriously those who are official members, with a certain number of points (which indicate personal and group commitment to our system). Those who contribute nothing to DirectDemocracyS, and don't know our internal workings, with roles that allow them to understand all our motivations, cannot judge us, and if they do, they're not credible, and almost always make a bad impression. All we need to do is tell the truth, and hasty and superficial judgments, and inconsistent criticisms, become veritable boomerangs that hit those who criticize just for the sake of criticizing.

We've always responded to every contact form received, according to our rules, methodologies, instructions, and rationale. If you have any questions, we'll be happy to answer them, or we'll send you a link to one of our articles that provides a detailed answer.

We only accept constructive criticism. Simply put, if you don't like something in our system, you join us and explain what you don't like and how you'd like to change and improve the parts you don't like, integrating them with your own ideas and projects, for the greater good. If you criticize us endlessly without offering fully functional solutions that don't overturn previous work, you won't get our attention.

After these few sentences, outsiders will feel offended or disregarded, obviously wrongly. Our communication style: repetitive, direct, often vulgar, lengthy, and detailed, has very simple motivations: to be unique and inimitable, even in our style. DirectDemocracyS and everyone involved are convinced that we must always tell the truth, when it suits us, and especially when it doesn't. We must always speak about demonstrable facts, from reliable sources, leaving to others (or to our internal free groups) all theories, all suppositions (which don't become reality just because they're believed by incompetent people), conspiracies, superstitions, and conspiracy theories, unless they're scientifically proven and professionally proven. This "less imaginative" but more concrete and real method forces us to tell everyone things "face to face," confronting everyone with reality.

We have never offended anyone, we have never generalized without logical reasons, based on common sense and mutual respect. In practice, if someone offends us, denigrates us, or demonstrates incompetence and bad faith, they cannot expect us to remain silent and submit to all kinds of physical and verbal abuse, threats to us and our families, insults of all kinds, and above all, lies. We often expose them, in many cases we report them, but we don't pretend nothing has happened.

We are not vindictive, but intelligent and determined.

Initially, we used many of the criticisms to explain many things, especially the reasons behind all our choices. In very few cases, we found tiny flaws and imperfections, which we resolved effectively before they could potentially cause problems. So, thank you for allowing us to justify our decisions.

Finding real flaws in DirectDemocracyS is truly difficult, and we say this not out of presumption, as everyone believes, but because we know how we decided every single rule, every methodology, and every instruction, both public and internal.

DirectDemocracyS is a system where anyone who joins brings ideas, projects, constructive criticism, and solutions, to make it increasingly fair, equitable, and secure. We don't have a single leader or a few powerful groups, but rather we are all integral parts of a single, shared leadership, and all our official members collectively own our entire system. While the first five creators and creators, along with the subsequent 277 official members from nearly every country in the world, wrote the fundamental rules and key methodologies, unique and inimitable, everyone from user 283 onwards has also played their part. Some more so with higher user types, some less so with lower user types.

Everyone who joined us used their brains, arms, legs, and above all their hearts, for the good of all humanity, and to create a system in which each of us felt truly important and that allowed us to be the true protagonists.

Such a collective effort, destined to continue forever, with the same rules and methodologies, can hardly have a flaw, and can hardly be criticized, if fully understood. It's reality; you can't continue to confuse it with our hypothetical presumption, vanity, and delusions of grandeur. Those who consider our tone "Messianic," as if we were saviors of the world, trivialize and insult the work of all who join us. Being proud of one's work and the results achieved is a duty, and telling the world so isn't vain, but realistic.

If we respond to criticism directly, it's because it's right to make everyone understand that if we do certain things in a certain way, we have many good reasons.

It's not about being defensive, but about providing accurate information, so that everyone in the public are able to know and, above all, understand.

We don't have persecution mania, but we are aware that we are annoying many rich and powerful individuals and lobbies, creating valid and coherent competition for all other political forces and all other systems. We annoy and create fair and honest competition (by creating all our own private systems and technologies), including all means of communication (radio, television, social networks), and even small anti-system groups, because unlike them, we not only criticize other systems, but offer innovative, credible, professional, safe, fair, equitable, and perfectly functional alternatives. We harbor no hatred against anyone, we are not vindictive , but we fear no one, and we will respond intelligently and decisively to any attempt to boycott, slow us down, or stop us. But if from time to time we complain about how we are treated, marginalized, excluded, and made invisible, we do so not because we feel offended, but because those who treat us badly do so against the well-being and right to knowledge, primarily of their users, certainly not ours.

Knowing that DirectDemocracyS exists should be everyone's right, and we should have the right to spread the word, without algorithms and paid people trying to harm us. We don't wage "wars" against anyone with our existence, and anyone can join us, to be part of our system, so we're not an exclusive club, nor a secret sect. We're not a closed system, but we're committed to exceptional security measures to avoid becoming like everyone else.

Anyone who joins us is not manipulated, but is liberated from the old ideologies that severely limit their judgment. We do not inculcate "our truths," but we do not allow anyone to exploit "weaker minds" to gain unfair and undeserved advantages and benefits. For us, ethics and morality must always take into account the well-being and interests of the entire world population, without any discrimination.

One of our greatest strengths, which once again makes us unique and inimitable, is unity in diversity, exploiting every idea and every project, from anyone who joins us, rewarding merit without favoritism.

We respond to a criticism regarding favoritism: we're accused of offering too many advantages and benefits to anyone who joins us first. In essence, they're telling us that "first come, first served." Our response is simple: do you think it's wrong to offer advantages and benefits to those who join a system like ours first? Those who were first to have the patience to carefully study our system, with the right mindset, open to our innovation, deserve recognition for trusting such a seemingly "crazy" project, when not many would have done so. It will be easy to join us in the final registration stages, when, while maintaining all our security measures, we will accept virtually anyone who wants to join us, without selecting the most compatible people. All of this will be possible only because there were courageous and willing women and men who joined us in the delicate and crucial initial stages.

When the top user groups, and all the most important and responsible roles, are filled by the people who deserve them, literally anyone who joins us later will have no chance of disrupting our system. To function properly, our system must ensure unity, equality, and competence, placing the best people in the best positions, where they can express their full potential. Whether it's right to reward trust and reliability is our duty. Ultimately, benefits and perks are purely strategic: those who arrive first have less competition for top user groups and roles of greater responsibility and importance, within our just, fair, loyal, honest, and inevitable hierarchies. But new users needn't worry, because it's not enough to secure important roles; they must be confirmed every day, through concrete, declared, documented, and verified activities. New members, too, will be able to secure similar roles, even replacing those who aren't performing usefully and concretely. The second advantage is obviously the many personal and group points accumulated by those who have been with us the longest. These points are essential to realizing every benefit and benefit. Finally, there's a question we ask everyone: who do you trust more, someone you've just met, or someone you've known for a long time? Those who arrive later must work hard, over the necessary time, to demonstrate that they deserve our trust. Our trust doesn't belong to a few members or a few groups, but to our entire collective system, made up of everyone who has joined us. These are some of the reasons why we encourage everyone to join us as soon as possible and to immediately begin accumulating significant points, so they can realize their potential, for their own good, and for the good of our entire system.

We conclude by inviting you to continue criticizing us, while also offering your own solutions. But don't judge us hastily, and above all, never judge without understanding our entire system. We will continue to amaze you with our work in the future.