Remote Participation in General Assemblies

For months there has been a call to bring the General Assembly into people’s homes. Direct Democracy doesn’t work for people who can’t make it out to directly participate.

Please join the discussion on this topic on the Tech Ops forums.

Portland is working on a proposal to allow people to vote over livestream while Boston is working on live blogging using a service called Cover it live. Here in NYC we are working on digital polling of GA’s using radio “clickers” as well as recording live tweets. Our live stream will soon be getting a high def boost to make sharing of our meetings all the more clear.

Let’s look at some of the pro’s and con’s of off site participation.


  1. Limits marginalization of not being able to come to a physical location
  2. Enables people to be more confident if they don’t like speaking in crowds
  3. Greater pool of feedback will produce better consensus
  4. Amazing outreach tool that will allow part time supporters to become better connected to the movement
  5. Improves transparency if there are more people watching and participating
  6. More inline with our principles of solidarity


  1. Could potentially limit real life participation!
  2. Technically/logistically challenging
  3. Greater opportunity for fraud, abuse, and trolling (disruption of process)

Tech challenges, How will we…

  • Prevent sock puppets and Trolls?
  • Put people on stack and have them address the body?
  • Test for consensus and reflect that to both the live and online audience?
  • Build trust around the system and avoid fraud?
  • Limit the scope of participants?

Have any other ideas?Please join the discussion on this topic on the Tech Ops forums.

Comments are closed.