Principled Blockchain Governance Requirement #7 - Community exercises their Democratic voice to set rules

BUT! We’re still not there because any two poles governance system as described in Principles #6 and before eventually collapses.

That’s because the poles eventually form a pattern where they are equal in some ways and entirely mirrored in other senses, and when they’ve evolved into the Republocrats and the Demipublans, they enter what is known as deadly embrace. And stasis ensues. In other words, the community gets locked in terminal war and dies a long slow torturous death.

The solution to this is a third chamber of governance, which creates a three-legged stool effect - strong and stable enough to support a community, but not high enough to lock the community up. And the goto answer here is to have literally that - a chamber of community governance over the various rules and processes. In that chamber, the community can vote on referenda of importance: who can be a Producer, who can be an Arbitrator, what a new rule can be, who gets beheaded, whatever your fancy.

Requirement #7 - Community exercises their Democratic voice to set rules

We know how to do this - it’s the voting thing from Steem/Bitshares. Basically, you and all of you mates can vote on any issue of importance, and this includes things like changes to the rules and upgrades to the software.

Now we’ve got a stable arrangement like legislature, judiciary, executive. Or, Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia, if you like your literature. Now we’ve got a governance mesa on which we can trade, build, interact. Safely and securely, to the limits of the system.

If you like that, let’s do it. Watch out for future developments that employ a Principled Approach to Blockchain Governance. You know you want to...

See also @dantheman's How to create a meaningful Blockchain Constitution and earlier post Why every Blockchain needs a Constitution.