Village
Demonstration

This is a demonstration. Southern Growers’ Co-operative, its branches and every position on this page are fictional, written to show the mechanism. The mechanism — many rooms on one question, consolidation that never averages, dropped branches named with the reason, sealed offline-verifiable records — is exactly how Consolidated Village Consensus works. It is built and validated end to end and can be demonstrated today; it is in beta, not yet running in any organisation’s general production. Everything on this page stays in your browser; nothing is sent anywhere.

Decide · Consolidated Village Consensus · demo

Five rooms. One question.
Nothing averaged away.

Five branches of a fictional co-operative run the same contested question. Each seals its own report. The results are drawn into one map — where the federation converges, where it divides and along which lines, and what only one branch holds. Never a score.

  • Members-only — a consensus is visible to the federation’s member branches, no one else
  • No score of any kind — no percentage, no support index, no overall position
  • AI rehearses; members decide — the two planes are labelled and never blurred
  • A branch that drops out is named, with the reason — never silently
Shared mandate · Southern Growers’ Co-operative · five branches

Should payout move from equal shares to volume-weighted shares — and if it moves, what must be protected?

The same question, word for word, put to an assembly in every branch. Each branch deliberates on its own floor, seals its own report, and consents — per mandate, revocably — to share it. The coordinator collects the sealed reports, verifies each one, and draws the map below.

Coordinated by
The co-op’s national office — itself a member of the federation. The platform operator can never coordinate, collect, or read any of it.
Branches invited
Riverbend, Glenfern, Harbour Road, Millbrook, Saltmarsh
What crosses between branches
Each branch’s sealed report and its verification receipts — never the raw deliberation
Status
Consolidated 16 July · sealed, write-once, offline-verifiable

The same five rooms, two views — each branch’s own sealed report, and the one map drawn from them.

The rooms — each branch’s own sealed report

Every branch keeps its own record. What you see per branch below is what it consented to share: its sealed report, whole, with its internal splits intact.

    Four things to notice

    1. Nothing is averaged. On the payout strand the federation divides, and the map says so — each branch’s position whole and attributed, and the minority inside Glenfern carried up to the top level verbatim. No blending, no majority line.
    2. The planes never blur. On the pace-of-change strand the rehearsals divided and the members settled it — Riverbend’s members chose the path their own rehearsal argued against. Every surface is labelled rehearsal or members, and only the members plane may ever be called where members stand.
    3. Saltmarsh is named. Its report failed verification at collection, so it was dropped — with the branch named and the reason on the record. An exclusion is never silent, because a silent one would misrepresent the federation.
    4. There is no score. Not on this page and not in the sealed record: the schema bans any numeric aggregate over positions. A division cannot be collapsed into a number, because there is no field to collapse it into.