Decide · Village Assembly · demo

One decision,
from proposal to sealed record.

Follow a fictional garden collective through a real Village Assembly process — and watch what most tools throw away get kept.

Members-only — visible to this collective, no one else Runs on our own machines, NZ & EU — nothing leaves the room AI facilitates; only members decide

A proposal is put to the members

Anyone in the collective can raise one. It states plainly what is being decided, by whom, and by when — before a single argument is made.

PROPOSAL VA-2026-014

Convert eight of our twenty-four plots to a shared food-bank bed for the winter season

The Corner Road food bank has run short of fresh vegetables three weeks running. This proposal would take the eight plots on the shaded south edge out of individual tenure from June to September and plant them as one communal bed of hardy winter greens — silverbeet, kale, broad beans — harvested weekly for the food bank. Displaced plot-holders get first right of return in October.

Proposed by: Ana Berger coordinator, plot 3
Who decides: All 24 members of the Fernside Garden Collective quorum: half the membership
Deliberation window: 26 May – 1 June poll closes 2 June, 7 pm
Decision rule: Consent poll set by this collective in its charter

Free course Learn how: The anatomy of a proposal — scoping a question a group can actually decide

Structured deliberation — position, then reasoning

Not a chat scroll. Each member states a position and the reasoning under it, so the argument can be examined rather than merely witnessed.

Ana Bergercoordinator · plot 3 For

Adopt the conversion for one winter.

Our charter says we grow for the street, not just the plot-holder. The south-edge plots yield least for individuals in winter but suit hardy greens fine. One communal bed, worked on the Saturday roster, puts fresh vegetables on the food-bank table every week of the cold season.

Marcus Reidtreasurer · plot 11 For, with condition

Support only with a hard sunset clause.

A season is an experiment; a precedent is forever. I'll consent if the conversion ends on 30 September automatically — no renewal without a fresh proposal and a fresh poll. Temporary things that need a decision to end have a way of becoming permanent things nobody decided.

Priya Sharmanewest member · plot 22 For, with amendment

Support — but draw the eight plots by ballot, not by map.

I waited two years for a plot, so I feel the cost of giving one up. But naming the south edge in advance puts the whole burden on the same eight people. If the plots are drawn by ballot across all twenty-four, everyone carries the same risk — and the decision stops being “their plots” and becomes “ours”.

Elena Novakplot-holder since 2019 · plot 7 Against

Object on principle: a majority should not requisition tenure.

This isn't about the food bank — everyone here wants it supplied. It's about what joining meant. We each signed for a plot of our own; the day a majority can vote a member's plot into common use, tenure here means nothing. Feed the food bank from beds we volunteer — I'll pledge two of my own rows tonight — not beds we take.

Ruth Caldertools & roster · plot 15 Against

Object on capacity: a shared bed without named hands fails.

Winter is when the roster thins, not thickens. Last July we couldn't fill the watering round for the two common beds we already have. A half-tended shared bed feeds no one — it just grows weeds with good intentions. Named plots get tended because someone's name is on them.

Assembly facilitator · Village AI organises the argument · holds no vote

Where the room agrees

All five contributors want the food bank supplied through winter. Nobody disputes the shortfall. The disagreement is not about charity.

Where it actually divides

One question: may a majority redirect plots that members hold individually? Elena says consent to join was never consent to requisition. Ruth adds a practical test: shared beds fail when the roster thins.

Amendments on the table

Sunset clause — ends 30 Sept automatically, no renewal without a new poll (Marcus)
Ballot draw — the eight plots drawn across all twenty-four (Priya)
Voluntary-rows alternative — pledge rows instead of plots; carried in the record as the stated alternative (Elena)

What the facilitator does not do: it drafts nothing into the ballot, weighs no argument above another, and casts no vote. It structures what members said so the members can decide. Inference runs on our own machines — the deliberation never leaves the room.

Free course Learn how: Structured deliberation — position → reasoning, and facilitating without steering

The poll — consent, counted honestly

The proposer accepted both amendments, so the ballot puts the amended proposal. Every voice lands in one of four boxes — and the objections count is displayed as prominently as the agreement.

As put to the ballot: convert eight plots — drawn by ballot across all twenty-four — to a shared food-bank bed, June to September, ending 30 September automatically; displaced plot-holders hold first right of return; Elena's voluntary-rows proposal recorded as the stated alternative.

Agree 9

Agree with reservations 3

Stand aside 2

Object 2

16 of 24 members voted — quorum met. This collective's charter adopts a consented proposal when objections, once heard and answered in deliberation, number fewer than a fifth of votes cast. Objections are preserved verbatim in the record either way — adoption never erases them.

Adopted · 2 June 2026 2 objections preserved in the record

Free course Learn how: Choosing a decision rule — consent, ranked and majority, and when each fits

The dissent travels with the decision

This is the part most tools throw away. Village Assembly seals the minority view into the same record as the outcome — verbatim, attributed, never averaged into a mush of “mixed feedback”.

Preserved in the record

“I object on principle, not on charity. We each signed for a plot of our own; the day a majority can vote a member's plot into common use, tenure here means nothing. Feed the food bank from beds we volunteer — not beds we take. I ask that this objection travel with the decision.”
Elena Novak · plot 7 · objection recorded 1 June 2026

“A shared bed without named hands is a weed bed. If it fails in July, this record should show we said so in June.”
Ruth Calder · plot 15 · objection recorded 1 June 2026

Why it matters: anyone who verifies this decision — next season's committee, a new member, the collective in an argument two years from now — reads the dissent beside the outcome. If July proves Elena and Ruth right, the record already knows. That is what makes revisiting a decision honest instead of political.

Free course Learn how: Dissent as an asset — why preserved minority views make groups smarter later

Sealed — and verifiable with no server at all

The whole decision — proposal, amendments, tally, and both objections — is hashed and signed with the collective's Ed25519 key. Change one character anywhere, and verification fails.

record    VA-2026-014
outcome   ADOPTED · sunset 30 Sept · plots by ballot
tally     9 agree · 3 reservations · 2 aside · 2 object
dissent   2 objections attached verbatim
          ↳ E. Novak (principle) · R. Calder (capacity)
alt       voluntary-rows proposal (E. Novak), recorded
sealed    2026-06-02 19:47 NZST
digest    sha-256 · 9f2c…a41d  (illustrative)
signature ed25519 · 7be0…c9f3  (illustrative)
signer    Fernside Garden Collective · assembly key

Ed25519 signature over the canonical record — outcome and objections sealed together, inseparably.

Verify it offline

The proof does not depend on us. No login, no server, no taking our word for it — the record stands up on a laptop with the network cable out.

Export the record

Any member downloads the decision as a plain signed file. It is complete in itself — proposal, tally and dissent included.
Hold the collective's key

The assembly's Ed25519 public key is shared when you join and printed in the minutes. It is not a secret — it is the collective's signature specimen.
Check it anywhere

Any standard Ed25519 verifier confirms the seal — offline, years later, on hardware we have never seen. Alter one character, and it fails loudly.

Free course Learn how: The record — sealing, tamper-evidence and offline verification, in plain language

Fictional garden. Real machinery.

Everything you just walked through — the structured positions, the facilitator that organises but never decides, the consent poll, the dissent sealed beside the outcome, the offline-verifiable record — is the working product, running members-only on machines in Aotearoa New Zealand and the EU. Only the names were invented.

Want to run one? The free deliberative-democracy course teaches the whole craft — from scoping a proposal to sealing the record — for any small group that wants to decide together, on this platform or off it.

Take the free course → Open a demo village ← Back to Village Apps See pricing

One decision,from proposal to sealed record.