Important mutual trust

We have spoken many times about the importance of mutual trust in building a useful and mutually beneficial collaboration.

When some people hear about our system, the first thing they think is: can I trust DirectDemocracyS? Our answer is simple: we trust everyone, until they prove us untrustworthy. We give everyone a chance, and we believe we deserve a chance from everyone to demonstrate our loyalty, reliability, consistency, and security. Often, the second thought many of our visitors ask is: why should I install a new application, and why should I create a new personal profile? Because we have our own platforms—free, independent, neutral, self-funded, and adequately protected—and we work only in our own home, which becomes the home of anyone who joins us, becoming our official member. And then they continue their reasoning: I already have so much online activity, I won't be able to do anything, I don't have free time, it's too demanding. No one is asking you to be on our platforms 24/7, but based on the types of users best suited to each individual's wishes, needs, and capabilities, we have all the necessary variables. From the free version, with no obligation to be present and no obligation to participate in activities with us, to the more "demanding" ones with greater unlocked potential, which we call superior user types. Those who join us can continue to do what they did in other systems and can continue to use the other applications, but as far as political activities are concerned, those who join us will engage in political activity within and outside of us (as our political representative, or official representative), only with DirectDemocracyS.

Fortunately, the majority of people decide to study us, and they evaluate our system positively, because they understand our enormous potential. At this point, many accuse us of having too many rules and of having created an overly complicated system, with excessive security measures. Finally, there are those who are pessimistic: DirectDemocracyS is too good to be true, others say there must be a scam behind it, and then there are those who are convinced they won't let us do it. All these phrases and statements are normal, and we had foreseen them from the beginning. The questions almost everyone asks are logical, and we are certain that we should always be cautious when participating in any activity: but these security measures, and this mistrust, shouldn't exist only online. Unfortunately, there are countless cases in which acquaintances, friends, neighbors, and even relatives, unwittingly, and sometimes even intentionally, lead us to believe things that aren't true, making us risk wasting time and money, and even our health, with activities that aren't entirely safe and reliable.

We believe that being suspicious is normal, but there are no certainties, or people, you can trust 100%, so whoever recommends DirectDemocracyS to you, first choose to study everything, and then if you like it and consider yourself compatible, join us, or wait a while, to see what people say about us.

There have never been, and never will be, any reliable negative reviews about us. We've been partially public for several years now, and we've already banned several dozen people, even placing some of them on our list of unwelcome guests. None of these banned users have ever written anything negative about us, because we don't delete or block people without valid reasons. One mistake isn't enough to get us kicked out, but if there are multiple mistakes and everything isn't done to fix them, we don't hesitate to punish the perpetrators.

Can you trust online reviews?

As for us, we've never asked anyone to write positive reviews, and instead we'll do everything we can to provide our version of events and respond wherever necessary to anyone who tries to write something harmful or false about us. We're committed to not being taken for a ride, and we'll respond with intelligence and determination to anyone who defames or disparages us. You may find countless negative reviews about us in the future, and we may struggle to respond to them all. However, we ask you first to ask us for an explanation, so you always have both sides of the story, and then you can decide which one to believe. We'll work hard to assert our rights and defend our good name, and for that reason, we ask you to report any suspicious news or denigratory activity against us, so we can respond appropriately.

We are always for freedom of thought, speech, and expression, without ever preventing anyone from having their own ideas, but we do not tolerate false news, biased interpretations, plots, conspiracies, and any kind of offense against our system, all those who are part of it, and all those who collaborate with us.

To report anything to us, please use our contact forms, as appropriate, at this link:

https://contacts.directdemocracys.org/contacts/reports

Trust must be continually demonstrated, and once lost, it is difficult to regain, and this applies to us, but also to anyone.

When someone joins us, they enjoy our full trust, and we don't take everything we're told to be true. We verify the mandatory information and then trust everyone, as long as they don't lie to us or commit despicable acts. Generally, we don't care about your background, and we welcome almost anyone, at any time. However, for certain activities, such as political representation, or to officially represent our system, we carry out much more thorough background checks. One example: we certainly don't place those with a final conviction for economic and financial crimes in positions where their background might create unpleasant situations, primarily for themselves, our system, and the general public. This example applies to all our activities.

But can people trust a system like ours? Of course, we won't tell you not to trust us—we're not that stupid—but we do ask you to give us a chance, as you've already given everyone else, even unwittingly and unknowingly. Examples include real personal data, our security measures, identity verification, and privacy settings. Anyone who joins us has the right to be, and remain forever, completely anonymous, and can choose to be and remain forever invisible to everyone else, both within and outside of us. This rule applies to all personal profiles, but not to two types of users: our political representatives and our official representatives, who are public figures, both inside and outside our system. They must, for obvious reasons, be identified, initially in small groups, and then, according to specific rules, in larger groups, and even to the entire world.

If you have any doubts but still want to join us, you can always choose to create a free personal profile, with no obligation to be present or to participate in any activities with us. In this case, you'll only need to provide us with some personal information, and we'll trust you, but we'll also verify that you have a valid personal email address (preferably protected by a secure password and two-factor authentication) and a valid phone number (which we'll verify before activating your account). Our registration forms ask for your real name and surname, date of birth, and full address, along with a few other personal details, such as whether you're eligible to vote and potentially run for office. With this type of user, the trust is mutual, and potentially infinite. Of course, to cast a binding and valid vote throughout our system, you must have a verified and guaranteed identity, to avoid fake profiles, multiple votes, and any other issues. There are very detailed implementing rules, which we won't repeat again, but which you can find in many of our other public information articles.

Anyone can become our free user, and any free user who meets all the requirements can choose to have their identity verified and guaranteed. Therefore, anyone can potentially hold any role, even very important and highly responsible ones, within our system. Beyond trust, we also have all the security measures needed to work within a protected system.

Some things that scare some potential users are the excessive complexity of our system and our security measures, which are considered "excessive." The world we live in is complicated, and to best resolve all the various problems, for the good of all, we need clear and detailed rules, perfectly functioning methodologies, and very detailed instructions. Everything must be able to prevent any potential problems and prevent anyone from using our system in an ethically and morally wrong way. Security measures are for the good and in the best interest of everyone, whether they are internal or external. Everything we decide has valid reasons; in practice, it could only have been done this way. Each of our rules has been voted on, and is therefore binding on anyone who joins us, based on individual proposals, collective work, and shared decisions. Those who join us can and must contribute to integrating their own ideas and projects into our system, respecting previous work, without distorting it.

There are people who, just by reading, or hearing, or seeing the word "system," see only negative aspects , thinking of all the old and failed traditional systems. When you think of DirectDemocracyS, you should never use the terms of comparison, or the bad habits, of everyone else. In sporting terms, we play a different sport, completely innovative and absolutely alternative to everything you know; therefore, we ask you to analyze and study us, with an open mind, to better understand who we are, why we were born, where we want to go, and how we want to get there. It all starts with a small step, to get closer, get to know and understand each other, and then we will collaborate, to change and improve the world. We are not perfect, but we are the only ones who give you the keys to the house. We are not perfect, but we will do everything we can to get closer to perfection, and to be what almost everyone would like us to be. We are the only ones who don't want to own the house: but who want to share it.