©2024 9×3 Narrative Logic, LLC
Conversational Game Theory (CGT) introduces a new companion for governance, a Global Conflict Resolution Library.
Our ability to train AI Agents to play conversational game theory from all possible perspectives means we can take any conflict in the world, train AI on all perspectives in the conflict, and immediately output resolutions to those conflicts. The system is immutable to subversion from bad faith actors.
Humans can join in at anytime.
Conversational Game Theory is a conversational game that forms a “narrative consensus composition”, a fully transparent resolution for decision making that offers conflict resolution for governance in such a manner that does not rely on a voting algorithm. Yes, this means that a consensus can form within a community without voting, it means a consensus can form through collaboration instead of competition.
Conversational Game Theory allows for a document, narrative, composition or contract to be negotiated successfully and published without a third party, without an attorney or a without a vote count, fully transparent and fully trusted.
Open, transparent, and continually resolving consensus governance
CGT is a type of game theory applied to conversation. As the game forms around distributing powers within the consensus editing process to participants who disagree and ask questions, it has the same open properties that any democracy does.
The distinction however is that this open consensus process does not rely on voting for consensus publication, it relies on a continually open conversation that is perfectly thorough, flexible, resolving and complete.
Conversational Game Theory indeed does have high stakes in consensus building. The stakes in Conversational Game Theory is the immutable publication of a consensus composition, a contract, derived from the whole system of conversations around the contract.
In principle, this is all any group or organization could potentially use for governance, whatever the consensus publishes becomes the directive or the decision and everybody participates in the conversation.
Yet Conversational Game Theory process is not designed to replace voting based Democratic systems, but to complement them, even integrate with them if necessary. Aiki Wiki can be an open, interoperable game to be exported to other systems.
Here are some different ways that a narrative consensus process can work alongside voting based systems:
1. Pre-Vote Deliberation:
Narrative Consensus Process: Before any formal voting takes place, participants engage in a thorough conversational game to explore different perspectives and build a shared understanding.
Outcome: This ensures that when the vote occurs, participants are well-informed and have considered all viewpoints, leading to more thoughtful and representative decisions.
2. Post-Vote Reflection
Narrative Consensus Process: After a vote, participants use the Aiki Wiki system to reflect on the decision, discuss its implications, and explore any remaining concerns or dissenting opinions.
Outcome: This continuous dialogue helps in addressing any issues that arise post-decision and maintains engagement and transparency within the group.
3. Hybrid Decision-Making
Narrative Consensus Process: Certain aspects of a decision can be handled through consensus, while others are resolved through voting. For example, narrative consensus could be used to set the agenda or frame the options to be voted on.
Outcome: This allows for a more flexible approach where complex, nuanced topics are discussed in depth, and more straightforward issues are resolved quickly through voting.
4. Consensus for Strategic Planning, Voting for Tactical Decisions
Narrative Consensus Process: Strategic, long-term planning is facilitated through narrative consensus to ensure comprehensive dialogue and inclusive participation.
Voting-Based System: Tactical, day-to-day operational decisions are made through voting for efficiency and clarity.
Outcome: This division ensures that broad, impactful decisions benefit from deep discussion, while operational decisions remain efficient.
5. Consensus for Problem-Solving, Voting for Implementation
Narrative Consensus Process: When a problem arises, a narrative consensus approach can be used to explore solutions and build agreement on the best course of action.
Voting-Based System: Once a solution is agreed upon, a vote can be held to determine the specific steps and resource allocation for implementation.
Outcome: This ensures that solutions are well-vetted and broadly supported, while implementation remains decisive and clear.
6. Iterative Feedback Loops
Narrative Consensus Process: Continuous feedback loops where participants engage in narrative consensus discussions at various stages of a project or policy implementation.
Voting-Based System: Periodic votes are held to make formal decisions based on the ongoing consensus discussions.
Outcome: This creates a dynamic governance system where decisions are constantly informed by real-time feedback and ongoing dialogue.
7. Emergency Decision Protocols:
Narrative Consensus Process: For regular decision-making, the narrative consensus process is used to ensure thorough discussion and agreement.
Voting-Based System: In cases of emergency where rapid decisions are required, a pre-defined voting protocol is activated to make quick decisions.
Outcome: This balances the need for in-depth consensus with the ability to act swiftly when necessary.
By integrating these approaches, organizations can leverage the strengths of both narrative consensus processes and voting-based systems, creating a more inclusive, flexible, and responsive governance model.
Version 3.0 of Aiki Wiki will be the completion of a Global Library of Consensus Articles that will be free of charge, Open Source, and in the Public Domain.