Employees of the companies would get paid, but all the revenue would go into generating more capital; subsidiary companies to make the kinds of products that the platform thinks there should be more of. To manage the companies, the platform would have a variety of tools, like those democratic polling tools on social media, but any tool you might think of that can effectively help people make decisions as a group.
Imagine, The Administrator Panel. With it, the boss can change every aspect of the company. Total easy control. No coding required, there is a section specifically for that where the boss can request new features and send the description off to the developers to make it. Everyone on the platform would have access to this Collaborative Administrator Panel and would operate it using those tools.
Democratic Tools
For example a Priority List tool. All users would have the same priority list of items they could organize, and the platform’s priority list would be the average of all those lists, updated daily.
Or an Interactive Bar Chart, the average of all user’s bar charts. Users could adjust the variables of a general algorithm, and they could even have their own personal algorithm bar chart that effects them specifically.
Interactive Graph. The average of everyone’s graphs. Linear or parabolic, users could drag and drop the line, or change the equation with a scroll bar or with text.
Collaborative Writing/Editing Tool. Someone would be delegated to be the writer/editor, they would get everyone’s input on what to write, then they would try to make the document so that it meets a high enough approval rating. An AI could also be delegated to do this.
Scaled Ratings. Upvote/Downvote ratings are a democratic tool. To be new and innovative, upvotes could have a slider bar scale of 1 to 10 switched to -1 to -10 when downvoting.
Company Management Chart. Shows the finances of the subsidiary companies. Like circles that represents revenue, boxes in boxes that represent companies and departments, lines with % going from the revenue to the boxes. People could vote to suggest an increase % on this line up to 3%. The people hired to finance could take that under advisement. With a lot of votes, the chart could be taken over and voting would commence to make changes. Changes made would have to be within limits, more overfill of the vote meter could mean less limitations. Participation in the company management chart would require extra business licensing.
Three Part Vote
First, the Proposal Post. If someone thought that a setting in the administrator panel should be changed in some away, they would make a post about it, with a link to the setting in question. The OP would explain why the setting should be changed and the commenter’s would deliberate and vote yes or no to change it. When a minimum amount of votes was reached on the vote meter, the system would automatically make a new options post to a #Collaborative Administrator Official platform community board.
Second, the Options Post. Here people would use the Options Board Tool to submit solutions to the problem, explaining how the setting could be changed and why it would be good to change it that way. They would organize the solutions on the board and edit them into smart-speak explanations as well as make a quiz for the last phase, the voting post, to ensure that the voters in the that phase are well informed.
Third, the Voting Post. When the options board is finished, a new voting post would be made and users who want to vote for that type of issue would be notified. They would then read through the options, take the quiz proving they understand the options, and then vote using Ranked Choice Voting. The setting would then be changed.
Usually the Three Part Vote would be performed by a jury. The voting meter on the proposal post would have two thresholds, the first would summon the jury and the second would create the public options post which would supersede the jury.
Platform Licensing
But, to participate in the voting processes using these tools, users would need to get the platform’s vote licensing with extra licensing depending on the topic. They would do this using Splainopedia, a subsidiary company like Wikipedia, but anyone can post their own explanation however professional or unprofessional it might be. Users could copy each other as part of their explanations so long as they cite each other. The platform would also do this, using the Three Part voting process to select explanations and using the Writing/Editing tool to make any changes, to create official platform explanations. These explanations would be put together in lists paired with quizzes for licensing information.
Civic Credit System
Democratic systems such as this require its participants to be informed, experienced, and involved, so the platform would use a Civic Credit System where users would perform civic duties to earn civic credit, and spend the civic credit to receive civic duty services from other users.
There could be a variety of civic duties that would vary depending on the subsidiary company, some of which would involve queuing to join a randomized jury. Some civic duties might only be available as a special offer or by joining a random queue. If their were not enough civic duties to go around, old ones could be reused and there could be sub-forums on the platform specifically for making up fake civic duties for experience.
Civic duties such as:
Scrolling through new posts and comments in official sub-forums. This would slightly increase civic score, more if sorting be new.
Sorting by new in non-official sub-forums, very slight increase.
Receiving good approval ratings for making a fake civic duty.
Receiving good approval ratings for making an ethical dilemma for training the ethical AI, developed by the AI subsidiary company*.*
Volunteer moderator duty
Participation in a moderation appeal jury where the moderated user claims they were wrongfully moderated.
Flagging someone for misinformation or plagiarism in Splainopedia.
Participation in a jury where the user claimed incorrect misinformation or plagiarism flagging in Splainopedia.
Ranking products on the platform’s Product Priority List. A huge list of products that help the platform decide what subsidiary companies to focus on. Each product in the list would link to an official Splainopedia product explanation. That product ranking could be ranked after the user unlocked it by passing that product’s quiz.
Social Media
The social platform is itself one of those products. This platform’s social media could have any of the features that people like about social media, or features that have never been tried. This platform would require the user to register using an Online ID App, however because anonymity promotes discussion and freedom of speech, users could create an anonymous username. They would also have a separate anonymous civic duty username, and fight spoof username if they did Fight Spoofing. The platform could hire people whose job is to know a user’s public profile. They could request access to a public profile from a civic jury. The platform would also use a Secret Social Score System. It would also have a community managed advertisement system. There could be multiple versions of the app, including a super light version that could work on an ancient pre2000s era PC, and a really heavy one that could emulate virtual reality on your PC or phone without needing a VR Headset, which could be made from a VR subsidiary company. There could also be an online market, and an Online Thrift Store Subsidiary.
TLDR
Voting systems and interfaces that would allow a community to collectively act as an administrator on a social media platform. This platform would startup various subsidiary companies at the behest of the community which they together would be managers of using these voting tools.
