Individual vs community mode

Individual Mode — the default

One person, their own computer, everything local.

Your positions, value systems, and evidence chains are flat files on your own disk. No server is required. Nothing is shared unless you choose to share it. Login is optional — the default user can use everything.

This mode is complete on its own. It is not a trial, a preview, or a degraded version of the real thing. A citizen who never signs in and never joins anything has the whole reasoning product.

That matters more than it sounds: a platform built for challenging power must not have a single point at which somebody can turn it off.

Community Mode

The same app, with pooling added on top.

Many citizens' individual decisions aggregate into a community position, and the delta between yours and the group's is shown rather than smoothed away. Communities have an access model — owners, writers, readers, and an optional world-read flag — and contain areas, which contain decisions.

Inside the trusted layer, votes are weighted by earned merit — bounded at 2×, and never more.

Community Mode is where identity starts to matter, and it is the only reason most citizens ever sign in.

What is identical in both

• The reasoning engine, the layered context assembly, and the first-principles constraint.
• The public record and every award computed from it.
• The rule that nothing is auto-approved and admins approve.
• The rule that the movement's data is a public repository you can clone either way.

Where the app runs

On your own machine, the normal case: a default user is allowed and login is optional.

Hosted, for a group that would rather not install anything: login is required, there is no default user, and logged-out visitors get the public read tier and an invitation to sign up for anything that writes.

The mode is chosen once, on first run, on a screen that asks exactly that one question. It can be changed later by an admin.