How each model solves the same problems
Instead of “democracy versus anarchism”, compare the concrete ways collective problems get solved.
| Question | + Model | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| How are decisions made? | Delegated UNI-weighted voting through forum comment, temperature check and on-chain vote with a timelock; initial quorum of 40 million UNI. | Each listed body sets its own well-being objectives and steps; the Welsh Ministers publish national indicators and a future trends report after each election. | |
| How are conflicts resolved? | Forum debate and competing proposals; no appeal beyond token votes; legal disputes handled through the DUNA wrapper. | The Commissioner may review a body and recommend; the body must take reasonable steps to follow or publish reasons (s 22). The Auditor General examines application of the principle. | |
| How are public goods funded? | Grants by the Uniswap Foundation funded from the treasury; protocol fees now used to burn UNI rather than fund public goods. | Covers the Welsh Ministers, local authorities, health boards, national park authorities and other listed bodies; public services boards plan locally. | |
| How is AI used? | None in governance. | No documented AI role. | |
| What are the main risks? | Concentration of voting power in venture investors and large delegates, agenda control by Uniswap Labs, low turnout and regulatory exposure. | Soft 'follow or explain' enforcement; procedural compliance; difficulty measuring long-term and preventative benefits. |
This illustrates differences in design; it is not a universal claim about outcomes. Each cell links to mechanisms and the claims behind them.