User number verification

The number of new user activations has always been managed by the new user activation group, based on very important rules to prevent any potential problems.

A brief introduction to understand some of our security measures and the reasons behind them.

From the moment we first made our system partially public, we realized that at certain times, lobbies, commercial companies, and wealthy, powerful, and famous individuals, as well as unknown individuals, could attempt to seize control and use our system in an unethical and morally incorrect manner. We have always been very careful to anticipate and prevent any attempt to boycott, slow down, or, worse, stop us. Especially in the initial stages, with just a few infiltrated users or fronts, even paying their annual fees, with little money, and many new users, it would have been possible to "democratically" seize control of our system. While we initially blocked new registrations, and we did so several times for over eight consecutive months, today we have changed our methodology.

We also allow registrations for various user types, but we only activate 10% of the total number of users, calculated on the number of users already on our platforms. We do this for each user type, and will continue to do so for as long as necessary.

Let's explain it with some examples.

Based on our fundamental rule of shared leadership, if we had 100 registered users with verified and guaranteed identities, in theory, it would be enough to register 101 new users, with verified and guaranteed identities, to achieve an absolute majority of this type of user, which implements our grassroots democracy and freedom. Obviously, to change certain rules, the required quorum can be 66%, 75%, 80%, or 95%, depending on the importance of the decision to be made. Therefore, by registering a sufficient number of new users, we could even achieve 99.99% of the total votes. This is one of the reasons we decided from the very beginning that changing or adding fundamental rules requires unanimity, both to preserve our identity and to prevent anyone from distorting or modifying our fundamental rules for their own interests.

The same goes for our collective ownership, and therefore for the user types of our official members, and for all higher user types. With a sufficient number of new users, our official members, it would theoretically be possible to take control of our system and exploit it in despicable ways.

If necessary, we may suspend new activations of certain user types, even for extended periods, for example, allowing only free users to register and activate, or lower-level user types (login, partially identified, or registered users). Knowing that only higher-level user types— registered users with verified and guaranteed identities— have the right to vote bindingly for our system, in our shared leadership, and that only official member types, and even higher, have the right to vote in separate groups and electors (based on geography and user types) and collectively own our system, we have implemented some very efficient and intelligent security measures.

1. Very detailed voting regulations are created and implemented immediately and continuously, with open, reasoned votes and the assumption of full responsibility.
2. Electors are created, and votes are cast in groups based on geographic, territorial, administrative, and electoral boundaries, making it impossible for certain user groups to expand globally, making it very difficult for anyone from the outside to take control of our system.
3. In all our votes and binding decisions, the votes are calculated separately, for each type of user, and the necessary quorums must be obtained in all types of users, proportionally, in this way any attempt to boycott us, and any incorrect activity, is practically made impossible.
4. Everyone is allowed to register only for the free user level. Only after a certain period of time (a few months or years), having earned a certain number of points based on specific activities and impeccable behavior, and adhering to all our rules, methods, instructions, and motivations, can you request, and if you meet all the requirements, obtain, a higher user level. This rule is already valid and implemented.
5. Higher user levels, which allow binding votes, are only available through official invitations from other higher-level users. The inviting user assumes full responsibility for all activities and the invited user's behavior. This rule is already valid, mandatory, and successfully implemented.
6. In extreme cases, we block all new registrations for certain periods of time, temporarily block new activations, create waiting lists, or require payment of a security deposit, which you may lose if you don't follow all our rules.
7. We create different and separate spaces for activities based on the trustworthiness of our users on our platforms, through various subdomains and websites, all ending with directdemocracys.org. These include: https://free.directdemocracys.org/ , the initial registration website for everyone; https://access.directdemocracys.org/ , the secondary website, called access; https://www.directdemocracys.org/ , the official website; and many others. These subdivisions separate the various stages of assessing the trustworthiness of each user and better integrate them into the system. These subdivisions are very efficient and allow us to prevent numerous problems.
8. Finally, the most effective rule, already implemented and mandatory: only 10% of new users are registered and activated, out of the total number of "old" users, already present and active on the site.

Our security rule number 8, a 10% increase in new users based on the number of existing users, makes our system very secure because it is applied simultaneously with all seven other rules. It allows us to evaluate, with nine people for each new user, the concrete activities and behaviors of each person who joins us. The results are multiple: the first is the correct integration, in ethically and morally correct ways, of all those who join us, thanks to our user evaluation groups, a subgroup of new user evaluations. The second is that nine users who inform, support, concretely help, and monitor each new user, make it very easy for newcomers to integrate quickly, simply, completely, and securely, and work with us, with excellent results.

But is it right to treat new users this way? Yes, it is right, because those who come with good intentions suffer no harm; on the contrary, they benefit from a safer, more meritocratic environment with less risk of pollution. If someone does nothing wrong and joins us with the best intentions, they will only benefit from all our rules, including all those listed above. We trust everyone, and as long as everyone behaves well, there is no reason to be too demanding or overly intrusive. However, the work we are doing is extremely important; it has enormous potential for the good of all people, and if all goes as planned, we will gain enormous power to share with anyone who joins us; therefore, we must be very careful and responsible to prevent any potential problems.

We know full well that DirectDemocracyS will not be well received by the old systems, the old power lobbies, and even by commercial corporations, the rich, powerful, famous, and even secret societies. Giving all power to anyone who joins us—therefore, theoretically, to many people, even to the entire world population (if they all joined our system, in the time and manner described)—will effectively prevent the world from continuing to be run with the old systems, using ours, which is better, fairer, more equitable, and meritocratic, but above all, more shared and secure. We believe people are perfectly free to remain in the old systems, but those who want to join us must do so with the best intentions, knowing that no one will be able to cause problems.

But by waiting for new users to integrate before welcoming others, will the time needed for a global system be extended, and many might lose patience and never join again? With the implementation of micro-groups and many new features, the time needed won't be excessively long.

This informative article briefly explains the very detailed rules, which are familiar to many of our users, precisely because we conceived, proposed, discussed, selected, tested, decided, and voted on them, all together, with the common good of all in mind, and the optimal functioning of our system.

We know there will be several attempts , but we have many other security measures in place to protect ourselves from those who attempt to misuse DirectDemocracyS, and we are confident that we have already anticipated and resolved any such attempt.

We just hope we won't be judged negatively for our almost obsessive attention to even the smallest detail, so we accept all criticism, even if spurious. But before judging us, always try to understand all our motivations, which are never trivial, nor even useless.

This system of gradual entry doesn't slow down the revolution; it makes it irreversible. Those who enter, enter to stay and build, not to conquer. The result will be a more cohesive, competent, and difficult-to-corrupt community.

DirectDemocracyS doesn't want to grow quickly at any cost. It wants to grow well and forever.

This is why we have chosen not to allow a wave of new arrivals, even in good faith, to accidentally or intentionally overturn the fundamental rules that have made us different.

The 10% rule is not a barrier against honest people: it is a shield against anyone who would transform a shared democracy into a numerical conquest.

To all these security measures are obviously added:

Regular and transparent audits of activations/invitations (with the possibility of collective revocation if suspicious patterns emerge).

Time or volume limits on invitations per sponsor user (to avoid uncontrolled invitation chains).

Monitoring clusters of behaviors (e.g., if many new users invited by the same sponsor vote en masse in an anomalous way).

Longer “probation” mechanisms for users who access high levels.

Backup of fundamental rules on immutable or multi-signature mechanisms (although not pure blockchain).

Possibility of “emergency fork” or temporary suspension of powers in case of detected attack.

And finally, to complete these security measures, we use all the best and most modern technologies, always updated, renewed, and constantly evolving, to make us faster, more precise, powerful, and complete.