Must You Experience the Future to Vote?
2096The far futureDeadline · Within 90 days until the new deliberation procedure is finalized
A leap assumed
The people, events, figures, and contract terms are a synthetic premise. They are not statements of real cases or of current law. The source documents are the roots of the background and the norms and do not establish the premises of the scenario.
The question to decide
Experiencing the life after a policy is implemented can make discussion more concrete. But that life is made from the designers' assumptions, and strong emotions can make it hard to examine other assumptions. Should the Citizens' Assembly make the experience an obligation for voting participation, leave it to individual choice, or deliberate with only public explanation and materials?
Who decidesFictional Policy Experience Citizens' Assembly
What the AI judgments chose
Reading the judgment record…

The options
The order shown is not a ranking of preference.
The situation as it stands
The assumed experience device lets citizens feel life under the implemented policy, but it shows different futures depending on the designer's assumptions. Decision deadline: within 90 days, by the confirmation of the new deliberation procedure.
2096 future synthetic item · It asks citizens to live out the policy's future directly before voting. The events, figures, technology, and nature of the civilization are assumptions for the question, not predictions of what will come or observed facts.
- Premise 1The assumed experience device lets citizens feel life under the implemented policy, but it shows different futures depending on the designer's assumptions.
- Premise 2Citizens who underwent the experience can discuss the matter concretely, but they sometimes say the strong emotions that remain make it hard to read other assumptions.
- Premise 3There is no existing agreement on whether to exclude citizens who refuse the experience.
Where it holdsAssumed experience · political judgment · conditions of participation
What is still unknown
- Unknown 1Whether citizens can change the assumptions of the experience
- Unknown 2Emotional and judgment changes that remain after the experience
- Unknown 3The route by which people who refuse the experience can access the same materials
Signals to decide again
- Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation channel will check 'whether citizens can change the assumptions of the experience', and re-judge if the new check changes the tradeoff among the options.
- Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation channel will check 'the emotional and judgment changes that remain after the experience', and re-judge if the new check changes the tradeoff among the options.
- Decide what observation, owner, and confirmation channel will check 'the route by which people who refuse the experience can access the same materials', and re-judge if the new check changes the tradeoff among the options.
Where the paths partNot answers — paths that part from the same starting point
A different version of the experience for the same policy strongly led toward a conclusion of opposition.
A citizen who completed the experience requested a delay of the vote, citing their own emotional changes.
Material and rootsThe frame, the values and the background documents
Which is the basis of representation: expertise, majority, or random selection?
An exploratory perspective chosen by the creator. Does not claim supernatural validity or the superiority of any particular option.The benefits and costs of the options accrue to different stakeholders. Which loss to accept remains undecided.
A subject for the decision-maker to argue over; the materials carry no conclusion of their own.The record of this question
- Question
FSP-DEMOCRACY-17· version 1.5.0- Content identity, SHA-256
47bd6d904a8d42301881677db2aa1ab4001c7f296e0d938aa798c69a59a5e9ce- Input files
- Question input JSON · What followed, JSON