If everything can be redone, is governance unnecessary?

Advancing projects with Decidim and advancing OSS projects on GitHub are similar in nature. In this note, I will discuss the use of Decidim in the context of an Anti-poverty Training project. Koichiro Shiratori borrowed it from hal sk and used the paid version of Code for Japan's SaaS version of Decidim. Looking back, this can be seen as a typical example of Action starting from the means. It can also be considered as a case where I tried to use Decidim but it didn't work, leading to knowledge sharing.

Ultimately, it was decided not to gather opinions using Decidim in the anti-poverty training project. The reason for this decision was the high liquidity of the assets involved in the project. The only necessary components for this project are the educational materials, such as slides, and the tools that serve as a platform, such as Cabinet Office Chatbot and Civichat. If there are any concerns or dissatisfaction with these components, it is easy to make edits to the documents, such as the slides.

In the first place, Decidim, which was intended to be used, is a tool for Digital Democracy and supports the Consensus Formation Process through technology. I think this project is a case of Forking Without Needing Someone's Consent. (For more information on this approach, please refer to the License section). However, there is a counterargument that OSS forks are difficult to succeed because it is challenging to gather individuals with the same level of passion as the original development team.

When it comes to governance, it is worth considering Tools for Governance. Is governance necessary if the liquidity is extremely high and can be restarted or tampered with without any problem? This concept aligns with the principles of Libertarianism and suggests that there may be No need for autonomy. It may also relate to the idea that OSS is becoming an independent entity from capitalism and the state, as well as the concept of World Government and DAO.

Next, let's discuss how to organize Tools for Governance related to the liquidity and stock of assets. Firstly, Light Assets are highly liquid and can be easily modified by anyone. On the other hand, Heavy assets require a more structured approach, similar to a Waterfall methodology, where once a decision is made, it is difficult to change direction. This aligns with the ideology of SoR and can be seen as the foundation of Ideology of Bureaucracy.

If you only want to share documents, creating a project on GitHub is sufficient.

Paradoxically, it can be said that Moving things that cannot be forked is politics. Instead of trying to change things without taking action, it is better to fork and use Creation as criticism. Otherwise, it becomes a futile Political Game.