Congredi builds public software & hosts services that help drafting, discussion, debate, & ranked choice voting for public policy decisions that are sourced with public information, logical in argument, feasible in reality, & agreeable by a wider audience.
We believe that:
- Actions & Changes in government should occur with public oversight, be factual & demonstrably effective, and be utilitarian in nature, without falling into fallacies of perfection.
- Policy should be drafted & debated simultaneously out in the open as public record, that since power corrupts, holding people to their principals is a public matter demanding oversight.
- Arguments should be irrespective of who you are, that facts and logic matter more than our biases, that doing this increases the right kind of engagement.
- Any metric can be cheated, but we may as well hold things regardless to those metrics we decide to use. We measure an alternative to something by the same principals we measured the original. If you claim to be demonstrative, you must prove it.
- Clarifying how other people see the world is the starting point to a constructive debate, that respect means a willingness to clarify things, whether or not you think of them as right or wrong.
- A diversity of viewpoints should be encouraged by giving a place for clarification, that it encourages constructivism & productivity, rather than yelling at an “other”, knowing that at your own table there are many people, and not falling into the trap of not asking your own camp and assuming you know them well.
- That moderation & compromise for diversity allows for your viewpoint to exist. That if you disallow compromise you must recognize the other side might do the same.
- Systems of representation should facilitate expression, and at the end of the day should move the needle forward, even if you don’t get everything exactly how you want it
- no political party can describe everyone, but a policy should leave consideration for everyone, that expression and identity matter,
- that improving the world means doing something that is feasible, supported by argument, and will cause enough of an effect to be observed.
- When you stand a chance for a debate, you should take it. When you’re dragged down at some level, you need tools to understand others, even when they appear to be set in their ways
- Efficacy in government comes from avoiding isolation in your own world view and blindness in your own biases, diverse arguments, anecdotes, & data inocculates you against weaknesses in reasoning or implementation
- digital ballots will never replace a paper trail for preserving the legitimacy of governments, but reducing the barriers to entry is correct when people have limited time to contribute.
- That the best feasible change should be taken, to stay productive, engaging, & utilitarian.
- more participation in government is right if it stands by these principals, and we stand a chance to move the needle on this by making these tools and studying these political methodologies further.
We want to be: * used by politicians, political parties, citizens, & experts * a public record of research & data from subject experts * the best drafting & debating platform * an accurate pulse on bills & elections
We function as a 501c that develops & evaluates software / political methodologies for political conversations. We have a 501c with 3 board members: the head of development, public relations, & finances. We are supported by charitable donation subscriptions through patreon as well as federal funding & grants.
We do not target individual users or sell their information, our analysis algorithms are our effort to break apart filter bubbles in a way that brings others together.
Development occurs out in the open, and board discussions are available as public record. You can find us on GitHub, our subreddit, or our forum (mattermost/discourse).
- That bill drafting should use congredi
- That party elections & actual elections should use congredi
- That elections should be ranked choice voting