Tag: competition

WinDG

Posted on by josuter

WinDG

Problem:  Democracy cannot function without good sources of information.    

Stories can be factually correct and still misleading if framing is incorrect or key parts omitted.  The same can be said for “truth”.   A better concept is “useful information”.   Useful Information (UI) implies a need for ideas and information to complete a specific task or answer a specific question.  It may require a search and more discussion.  

How do we even talk with people who have their own facts, or seem uninterested, or intent on building a counter narrative?   We can challenge them to a game of discovery.  We may discover new things too.  The tools of discovery involve the creation of small group structures to help find and filter useful information. Organizers of such groups can even make a small profit, a Win!   How do we start?

Good Question

We are all asked questions by family, friends, and teachers early in our own development.  Many of us will learn how to ask ourselves good questions.  Leaders and talking heads ask questions too, some of which are rhetorical questions – to which, of course, they have the answer.  Some questions are intended to mislead or incite some action in the audience.  The point here is that these questions initially come from someone else, even an outsider.  These may or may not be the best questions.  With a bit of practice and a few other people, we can learn to frame the problem, develop better questions, and search for solutions in a more efficient and effective manner.   

How Do You Know?  

This question, “How do you know – anything?” is an essential question to make progress toward solutions.  If this question is not asked, people don’t know that they don’t know.  Trusting the source is often equated with trusting the information.  The opposite is equally true, i.e. not trusting (or not liking) the source will lead us to reject information from them. 

Create Information Filters with Discovery Games (DG)

One can create an information filter on the receiving end (not the broadcasting end) by using Small Groups (SG) of people divided randomly into teams with a few players each, plus some judges, also picked randomly, who can decide which team has the best information and wins the prize.  This is real competition for a short period of time – minutes, hours, and sometimes days if the search time must be extended. Players and Judges (PJ’s) are mixed and remixed as needed.  Outsiders who may believe different facts can be invited a few at a time and folded into the mix.  One does not have to argue with them in public.  Simply challenge them to bring their facts to the game.  

Play Ball

Discovery Games follow the model of sports, except that the goal is to find and filter ideas and information rather than to hit a ball into the net.  There will be look-alikes who swear they have found the truth, but their results can be run through another filter at any level.  Which one will you believe?  The process must be efficient and take almost no time of the organizer or sponsor.   PJ’s can even start their own game.  If necessary, they can each put in a small bit for a prize to help focus their minds for a short period of time.  

Push the Process

DG’s can be useful, but the real power lies in pushing the DG process itself to other small groups and other communities.  Starting a new DG in another place can be the goal of a preliminary DG. Getting outsiders to use DG’s may require a larger starting prize, but not too high.  The prize should be just enough to hold attention for the duration of the game.  

And what issues?  What is the Discussion Question (DQ)?   It can be almost anything in which better information could make a difference, but there is really no limit.  It could be a personal question, a local issue within a church or school.  Even national and international issues are fair game. 

Campaign finance is often associated with ‘getting out the message’.  The number of votes received often correlates with the amount of money spent but this is not always the case.  It should be about finding better information.  Better information in political campaigns can be achieved with a DG-type filter.  This requires debates within the private team setting before presentation to each panel of  judges.  Debate is essential.  Andy Grove, CEO of Intel during an especially turbulent transition period, learned the importance of having a vigorous debate before making decisions that would affect the whole company.   Democracy now needs more real debates on many issues and at many levels.  

DG’s are not a social gathering. The goal is the finding and filtering of useful information.  Players can use any source of information.  Keep prize money local and offline if possible.  Challenge other small groups.  They must often make the discovery themselves.  An example might be a tobacco company who want to make cigarettes in a local factory to provide jobs.  Not everyone believes that is a good idea for their long-term health. 

Win Win Win

Readers of this web site (YOU) can start a DG and make a profit.  Your added value lies in organizing people who may not normally talk with each other.  You are giving them the tools to move forward on some issue.  Once people understand the game and want to play, they can contribution a small amount of money.  You keep 10% for organizing the game.  

You do not have to be the moderator, however.  Simply invite a dozen people (5 minimum) and divide them into 2 or 3 teams of Players, plus Judges (PJ’s).  Give a DQ (Discussion Question) and a time limit.  Teams meet in private.  Judges decide on the winning team and a prize is awarded.  Players and Judges can be re-mixed (or not) and the next DQ is announced.  This process is repeated until PJ’s find better information or have something to act on.  Follow-up to an action can be done with the same structure.

Why is privacy important?  Why is competition important?  These can be Discussion Questions for a game.  The DQ process must be transparent to the PJ’s, enough so that they can trust the results.  First games can start with any Discussion Question and then move toward more serious issues.  

Push Uphill

Once players understand the game structure they will expand its applications to other groups and other communities, near and far.  Competition can be with any other group and on any issue. Pushing one community uphill toward sustainability can be a series of games with many parallel DG groups focusing on that one community.  Why push others uphill?  Because a lot can be learned and brought back home to use.  Plus it can be fun. 

Evolution or End of the Nation-State?, Part C – Principles of Design for Change

Posted on by josuter

Evolution or End of the Nation-State?                                         J. Suter

PART C – Principles of Design for Change

General Principles:

  1. FB is Key

  2. Structures influence the FUI

  3. SG + Gradient create UI for FB

  4. FComp creates Gradients + Increased Interaction

  5. PUH + BTB

  *DIG Tools (# 2,3,4))

(FB=Feedback, FUI=Flow of Useful Information, SG=Small Groups, UI=Useful Information, PUH=Push Uphill, DM=Decision Maker, BTB=Beyond the Border, DIG=Division for Information Gathering, TL=Target Learner)

General Principles

What are the General principles for moving the Nation-State to the next level?  Providing Useful Information (UI) as feedback to Decision Makers (DM) is key.  We know that structures of any kind can affect the flow of useful information, so using small groups as a division of labor can help find and filter useful information. Competition can create gradients or incentives, resulting in more interaction.  Contrary to historical practices, we must push others uphill to create sustainable communities, both here and in other countries.  It may be the only way out.

Can we see ahead enough to survive?  How will we organize if there is no nation? What forces will provide a gradient if we give up the gun? (Don’t give it up!)  Who will give us a clear vision and a goal? (We do!).  If we want real change, the attitude that we can defeat other countries must be turned upside down.  We do not want our opponents to feel insecure.  We must push them uphill toward a sustainable existence, town by town, village by village. 

Milton Friedman described change: “Only a crisis produces real change . . . and actions depend on the ideas lying around.”   Yes, but that is change from the top when leaders feel the ground shifting.  Long term change is more like the biological change that happens within our cells every day.  That level of change is what creates and adult from two cells that just happen to meet during conception.  That’s change!

How and Who? – Personal Stuff

Creating change can be very personal, so a few personal suggestions are in order: Do not be surprised that average citizen does not want to talk about important issues when they have no tools to talk.  Who would listen to them anyhow? Look for creative applications, from small local issues up to the level of international affairs such as use of Dynamic Democracy for the Israel-Palestine Solution.  (see “Israel-Palestine Solution” at <  JoDa dot substack dot com  >)

In creating public conversations, grassroots people mostly do not have 1. A task or goal,  2. Time to Talk, Listen, Think, Decide (TLTD)  – at least not in public forums.  3. Small Groups (SG) with which to bounce off ideas and information.  They must create these themselves because no one else will. 

Resistance to this process may arise from any level.  There may be more resistance at the grassroots until they understand the process.  Try lighthearted issues to start. If resistance comes from leaders, then incorporate them into the process as players. Should feedback be anonymous?  Think about it yourself or ask your SG.

Some issues may require Privacy and Deniability as part of the information and feedback process.  Drop the cynics.  Confront and challenge detractors.  Postpone meeting with those who are angry and move on if there is no progress.  This is not a social club. 

Many will wonder, “Why should I push others up the hill?  It’s not my town.”  People with no direct skin in the game can be neutral observers yet create their own game with whatever goals they choose, just for fun or a challenge.   With this attitude, they may be able to work around the existing resistance within some local hierarchy or work around resistance from BOG-power alone.  This can benefit everyone.  (see Examples and Possible Applications below)

Connect people to each other

We cannot force a Western-style democracy on every country in the world, but we can still push people in other countries to listen to each other.  Find a specific individual in other country as a touch point and to start the process.  “Is someone stealing from them?”  With modern communication technology, this information can be found and passed on to other people of that country.  Connect people to people.

One example in the developing world is the building sanitary plumbing for a community.  This is an under-appreciated factor in the creation of a stable society since it helps to minimize disease-borne vectors.  This is also something that local people can do themselves if they have tools of organization and communication.

1. Feedback is Key

Why were European leaders stunned from recent election results?  They had different sources of information and were surrounded by advisors, each of whom had their own agenda.  i.e. They obviously did not have good feedback during their time in office and used only information sources that reinforced their position. 

As noted before, Feedback (FB) is good, useful information at the right place and right time.  Those who do not recognize the value of FB mechanisms are under the spell of the BOG-only force behind the social hierarchy.  For public policy or legislation, FB can be given from people on the outside and after a policy in place.  If leaders do not listen, then grow the number of SG’s and repeat.  Remember too that SG to provide FB can be comprised of a mix of people across national boundaries.  

2. Structures influence Flow of Useful Information

Physical structures, social structures, real or metaphorical structures – any structure where tension can be applied for discovery of ideas and information.  Many structures will be temporary.  People do not want change that comes too fast, so the best option is to make people part of the change process and part of the feedback loops.  Teach others to push even farther into their community or other communities to create secondary and tertiary effects.  This process can start at all levels but may also leapfrog levels of the local or larger hierarchy in order to Focus on a Few individuals (FOF), DM’s, or communities. 

Taiwan Perimeter – A Structural Solution

Looking at the situation in Taiwan from the Taiwan perspective, one can understand the mixed feelings since Taiwanese are ethnically and culturally very close to the Chinese.  Yet they have their own country independent of China and do not want to be given promises, then swallowed up like Hong Kong.  A structural solution might be beneficial.  Taiwan could invite a number of friendly countries to create settlements along their coast, each allowed approximately one square kilometer with access to the sea.  A wall or barrier controlled by Taiwan might surround that square kilometer (on 3 sides) so that the invited country remains separate.  From the air it would look like a square-tooth saw.  If China invades Taiwan they will have to get past these many teeth.  This increases the perimeter length of Taiwan just a bit and, on the positive side, may allow for more trade if that is what the various parties agree to.  Rather than become more isolated, the future nation-state may be more intermingled with its neighbors, bringing both enemies and friends closer.

Focus on a Few (FOF)

Creating good feedback is key for any kind of government.  But how does one start the change process with feedback to the decision makers, to neighborhood communities, or other grassroots people?   Use friendly competition to give feedback from many individuals or SG’s to one DM using the upside-down pyramid power.  The metaphor here is that of a magnifying glass focusing the sun’s rays on one spot.  This requires some coordination, but it can push for change.  

FOF can be positive or negative.  It can also be used in a positive way to push individuals uphill into a professional role (though it cannot guarantee a professional degree).  Maybe push someone to learn a foreign language to expand their capacity to communicate.  Focus many on one or two people, one or two DM’s.

We can challenge others, even those outside our own country.  People can be invited or challenged to play a game like baseball, but in which they make decisions for other people in other communities.  Even if there is no acceptance of the SG’s ideas, their world has been enlarged a bit.  Another strategy – After a round or two invite (you pick) and challenge others from those communities to be part of an SG. 

OPOV versus Dynamic Democracy?

What of the one-person-one-vote (OPOV) democracy?  Is this the best we can do?  Is it nimble or flexible enough to survive a changing environment?  A better solution for a faster changing environment is the Dynamic Democracy such as the one suggested as a solution for Israel-Palestine.  No matter what their percent of the voting public, secular Jews can control the military and national security because of outside threats, but other government functions can be headed by various other groups.  Like the Treaty of Westphalia, it can work if there is an agreement by the leaders or the people who sign an agreement.

Dynamic Democracy goes beyond majority rule to incorporate specific feedback loops.   An example might be some specific question about the federal debt given to the voters with a January birthday.  They may not have special voting rights but can provide useful information as FB, both to other voters and politicians. There is a need for specific FB on many issues, but especially in conflict areas SG may have to incorporate people with knowledge of the situation such as the conflict in Haiti.  Bringing in outside militia to Haiti may be a temporary solution but it is also top-down and susceptible to misinformation by the people taking control.  

If money warps useful information, Move the Money (MTM). 

Instead of supporting specific political parties or interest groups, we can pay each other to gather and filter information.  If necessary, currency can be created among small groups where accountability can be done on a frequent basis.  Create a Division of Labor for gathering and filtering information (DIG) on the many issues that need attention.  Divide by the day and month of birth, Age, Gender, Race, Religion.  Almost any division will work since other filters may also be added later. 

Intermediate (time, position) Goals are set locally. Push to make decisions.

Goals can be intermediate in time, place.  Push all directions.  Push-Pull others to make decisions, both small and large.  Share UI if possible.  Push discovery and tools of communication.  This does not require salesmanship.  Instead challenge others to search and discover.  Make the enemy more stable?  Yes.  Who has the most powerful God, the God who takes care of everyone?  Make this your Story. 

3. Use Small Groups (SG) and Gradients to find and filter Useful Information. 

    Then use this UI as FB for Decision Makers and others.

Moving Useful Information (MUI) is Not the same as surveillance.  Do Not get rid of privacy.  In fact, privacy is part of the SG process and essential to finding UI.  We do not need to make everything transparent. 

Increase interaction, not isolation.  Develop and discover good Questions – another role for SG.  Ask both general and specific questions.  Finding a workaround for a specific Decision Maker or Politician who will not or cannot listen. 

SG tasks include the gathering and filtering of information.  SG can meet online or face-to-face.  Participants can use any source of information and share the best sources with others.  To extend the example given above – the Division of IG among SG’s might be a division by birth month: January BD – an economic question; February BD –a defense issue;  March BD – a social issue.  

Work to make the process efficient.  Leaders with little time and strained resources will make people wait in line with petitions or requests, then make them go to the back of the line again.  We need a workaround.  If only BOG-power is used, then it becomes difficult to Move Useful Information (MUI) up the ladder.

Specific issues can start anywhere on any level.  Start with a Question or an Idea.  Then fin a Small Group.  Create gradients.  Do several rounds of Small Group work before approaching a Decision Maker with Feedback.  Some issues may require privacy and deniability.

4. Use of Friendly Competition to create gradients and increase interaction. 

Better input creates better output for DM’s and for us all.  This includes having good mental models and group processes.  To use friendly competition for creating gradients or incentives, each participant could bring few dollars for a prize.  Set up places and processes for people to talk, even about difficult issues and with people they don’t know or like much.  Push others just beyond their reach and to make decisions.  Results can be tested by other SG’s.

Gradients can be created to decrease Negative Tension that leads to conflict.  Crowd funding can create a gradient and a general direction, but more specific information filters are needed to move a community toward stability and sustainability.  When gradients are created to decrease negative tensions we should expect something from both sides of the conflict.  who

5. Push Uphill (PUH) and Beyond the Border (BTB)

Immigration issues have shown that borders are important.  We can go beyond the borders to create safe zones in other countries using these processes and decrease the pressure of immigration.  How do we do that?  Find someone who knows someone else who can contact or travel to the target town.  Being a “Target Town” (like “Target Learner”) is mostly a positive thing since it implies expectations and a willingness for outsiders to invest time and resources to push them onto a sustainable path.  Invest at least several days or weeks (months at the most) before moving on.  The time period should be similar to how much time it takes to show people how to play baseball or any new game they have never seen before. 

Examples and Possible Applications for Small Group feedback: 

Health Care and Education; Catch up on school lost because of Covid.  This could be specific grade-level work.  Teachers might help as consultants but if no teachers are available, then SG’s can do it alone.  Health Care – diabetes, obesity, competition to decrease fentanyl abuse and other addictions.  Use hypothetical cases if real cases are unavailable.  Domestic violence, inner city violence, or violence Beyond The Border (BTB) are possible applications; Sanitation projects; Homelessness is a current political football in major US cities.  Many of the Homeless can be participants and make decisions as part of a SG team and may offer insights to the right Questions or even to help to discover what the right Questions should be.  In all of these, we may find that current governments have no time or resources.  Yet fundamental changes can happen with good information gathering.  

OBOR – Structures and Small Groups for the International Arena

Another example might be the One Belt One Road (OBOR) that China is pursuing. China is not doing this simply for the benefit of other countries but also to expand China’s hegemony to a larger part of the world.   Taking out a few links from the belt is one strategy to counteract the process but this cannot be done at the leadership level alone.  We can push the target link country to become self-sufficient so that they don’t need China.  Traditional foreign aid that starts with leader-to-leader talks may be inadequate.  That type of structure lends itself to corruption that creeps in and money disappears.  Targeting these link countries must include all levels of society: teachers in one country working with teachers in the target country, farmers with farmers, business people with business people.  Make the projects small, quick and efficient.  The goal is not simply getting acquainted with other people but rather pushing and pulling people to make decisions. Start with FOF.

Parallel Information Sources and The Deep State

The NS might need an enemy, but does it need a Deep State also?  Probably not.  The function of Intelligence will still be needed to provide useful information for Legislators and the Executive Branch to make better decisions.  However, a Deep State that is not accountable is a problem.  It may be difficult to de-construct the agencies and then re-build them.  Here a mental model of a parallel bridge structure can help, not unlike the parallel bridge built in San Francisco after the earthquake.  Take the 195 (approx. 200) countries existing around the world and divide them among the 50 states so that each state is responsible for about 4 countries.  Each state can use any process to gather what they believe is useful information on their 4 countries and present it to Congress and the Executive Branch who can then compare that information with what they get from the current Intel Services.  Discrepancies should be explored, but it would provide a bridge to Intel agencies who are truly accountable to Congress and the President.  This is a task-specific project that can be done by the 50 States or by a private-public combination. 

Local or Regional Decisions on AI

One of the best uses of Artificial Intelligence is to increase the Real Intelligence of people learning anything new.  The downside of AI is becoming evident when nation-states use both AI and drones for surveillance.  At the present time, AI is also being used to target civilians in war-like situations.  If the community is the basis for morality, then any use of AI or drones should be cleared by each community who must concomitantly take responsibility for creating a safe place to live. 

Unless there is a visionary leader, one cannot start at the top.  And because they are busy with other things, grassroots people are not usually organized until they have a task, some tools, a structure, and possibly an incentive or gradient. 

Starting a SG & PUH

Are we changing the people at the top or at the grassroots, or are we simply changing the structure within which we act?  There will be resistance to any change from family, friends, and colleagues who say they have your best interests in mind and do not want you to do anything that might look “stupid”.  Is that good advice or are they simply afraid?  The irony is that our source of love (family, friends, and community) can also be the major source of resistance to any change.

The Target person may say they have “no interest” but they can still participate since we are looking at the learning process itself, not necessarily with playing permanent roles. We are also not taking an academic test. The power of the target learner is that, for a short period of time, he or she has a team to help find and filter useful information. 

Are we “challenging” people or “selling” to them.  Maybe some of both, but a straightforward challenge may help to decrease the effects of guilt and it will become easier to pose further challenges.  Think about how the sport of baseball or other team sports spread from town to town, even at the kid level.  The SG information processes will be similar.    It may be easier to pick Target Learner from outside your own group to Push Uphill. 

Must we make the nation-state disappear – or evolve?  Can we balance the system with better FB?  An application of better FB will help a better system emerge.  We can follow Hans Morgenthau and believe in balance over dominance.