Skip to main content

Meritocracy

Every system that pools opinions has to answer one question: whose opinion counts, and how much?

Count everybody equally and you get the crowd, which can be flooded by anybody with a budget. Count only the credentialed and you get the same small group of people who produced the situation the movement exists to fix.

The movement's claim is that collective intelligence beats both — but only if influence is earned and visible. So the trusted group is not a club, a rank, or an appointment. It is a ladder with published criteria that citizens climb by doing verifiable work, and how loudly somebody is heard moves with their climb.

The ladder

New -> Identified -> Contributing -> Established -> Steward

Each rung has published criteria. Promotion is audited, and so is demotion.

Merit is a number, not a badge

Every citizen carries a merit score on 0 to 100, derived from the same evidence the ladder already uses. Inside the trusted group, a citizen's vote is weighted by it.

The ceiling

merit weight = 1 + lambda x ( merit score / 100 ) lambda = 1.0 by default

At the default, a maximally-meritorious citizen's vote weighs twice a just-admitted one's. And no more.

That ceiling is the most important number in this area. Two-times is enough to reward a decade of work and far too little to let anybody own an outcome. An unbounded merit weight is how a meritocracy becomes a hierarchy in about three years — which is the failure mode of every institution the movement is arguing with.

Pages in this area

Where to go next