Editing Consumerium governance

'''[[Consumerium]] [[governance]]''' is how it runs [[Consumerium:itself|itself]] - the [[protocol]] that keeps everything "fair and above board".  This should be as close to a [[formal protocol]] as possible.

== continuous improvement ==

While [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] deals with daily issues of [[Publish:governance]], [[Research:governance]] and building a [[healthy signal infrastructure]], what it does must be formalized into:
*[[publish protocol]] to keep generating a [[Consumerium buying signal]] that satisfies [[individual buying criteria]] and [[institutional buying criteria]] of uesers
*[[research protocol]] to keep gathering and filtering data from all [[faction]]s for all [[individual buying criteria]]
*[[integration protocol]] to keep funding servers and expansion that meets our own [[institutional buying criteria]] and creates [[healthy signal infrastructure]]

Because Consumerium seeks to empower [[consumer]]s to affect [[corporate governance]] and perhaps [[government]] attitude to [[trade]], it should be a very good example of governance responsible to our [[values]].  Whatever they are. 

== counter-bias ==

It is clear that Consumerium has and will continue to have a [[Consumerium:Systemic bias]] based on the values of the people building it.  This must be inverted, by applying a counter-bias in governance.  ''Note:  [[Wikimedia]] does the exact opposite!  It must not be copied in this respect or [[CGO]] will fail.  See [[m:Wikipedia Governance]] for debate on one-man rule over there.  See also [[GodKing]].''

== issues ==

Specific issues in Consumerium governance are:

*choice of a [[Consumerium board]] - by default now it is just [[User:Juxo]] or "Chairman Juxo" or "Chief Gardener Juxo" or "Janitor Juxo" or whatever title he likes.  
*choice of [[licenses]] - note that there are few contributors now, and it is not too late to require that all contributions accept that a change of license be possible later, under the terms of governance we eventually work out for that (in other words notify that unless you object in such and such a time after a notice of change of license, the material is under a new license, and you lose rights to say fork off a new project with the old material without problems).
*ways of assessing [[Consumerium:project future|project future]] and [[project status quo]] - ''see [[m:governance]] for some ways to do this, not sure if they've been tried.''
*other things that might have to be listed in a [[board manual]] - ''see [[m:board manual]] for a possible starting point for Consumerium's board - and [[m:Wikimedia board]] for an example of how not to do things!''
*picking the right balance of tools, rules and fools.  We hate [[w:bureaucracy|bureaucracy]] for practical reasons, but sometimes zero-bureaucracy (like [[GPL]]) just leads you into more control by official bureaucrats and wasting your life defending your work.  High-bureaucracy (like [[w:Business Software Alliance|Business Software Alliance]]) has some benefits but is mostly just oppressive.  [[w:Consortium|Consortium]] usually fall in between and balance a little more bureaucracy and obligation up front with a way to manage unforseen events later on, the main reason to even consider '''governance''' important.

== interim step ==

It is not reasonable to expect all [[protocol]] to work on day one without gathering expertise of experienced people:

Eventually a [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] must take over from the founders, and regulate the '''Consumerium governance''' protocol in a fairer way than any of us can manage - we are not so foolish as to imagine that this means always relying on the original [[Consumerium board]].  It must be assumed that eventually the project is too complex and contentious to be "controlled" by anyone, and that the organization/board is primarily trying to [[obsolete itself]].  This probably is its ''only'' "job".  A [[Transparent Consumerium]] would use the CGO only to resolve disputes that arise about the CGP fairness.