Like any platform, America's possibilities and limitations are governed by its legacy Operating System. Let's call it the USOS, and it's essentially unchanged since the 1880's.
I suggest that the gestalt and guidance of USOS v. 2.0 should be by women and not men. Not because women are intrinsically more wise, good-hearted or open-minded than men. But because the medium for USOS 2 is the Internet, and I assert that any network of adhocracies is a feminine architecture. USOS v.1 was predicated on the 'smoke-filled rooms' of political machines' hierarchies based on the 1880's Tammany Hall model of governance.
Would YOU support and champion a sex change for USOSsensibilities &architecture?
It's not just a cute construct. We have serious issues which are presumably based on serious governance flaws. In any field, we seek the most qualified types of people, having the right character traits, to serve on boards and in the C-Suite.
Crowd-sourced policy services at NewGov.US
are a necessary precondition, and probably sufficient, for activated constituents
to surround and guide/manage their politicians: publicly, persistently and pointedly enough to affect their politicians career planning. ('Activated
': residency certified by a trusted, 3rd party, out-of-band, Geo-Identity reputation provider.)
Our family nonprofit, theNewGov Foundation, has funded an impressive dev team since 2004, when the Howard Dean campaign taught me that the American electorate is a sleeping giant, eager to wake up, absent only a catalyst. For my wife and me, a million dollars is a lot of money, so it's time to formalize the effort and scale it to the point that it's attractive and viral enough to guide more than a few politicians.
So we must decide what sort of co-founders, co-funders and leadership we should seek to mainstream the crowdsourced policy platform. FounderDating is the first public forum where I've posed the question.