As a ‘channel for collective intelligence’, do you represent a completely new kind of politician? Can you see a world where the holders of executive office are the convenors, moderators, referees or chairpeople of scaled listening processes rather than decision-makers?
Do you think it’s possible that Taiwan will constitutionally reform in the years ahead to formally recognise the normative power of processes like vTaiwan?
At the most fundamental level, do you personally have a preference between all the different liquid, direct or deliberative, alternatives to representative democracy that are becoming available?
Globally, do you think we are on the cusp of a general period of reform on how democracy is achieved?
Last (and apologies if this is covered elsewhere, I couldn’t find it): is it true that you record, transcribe and wikify all the meetings that you hold as Minister?
1-1. Re chairpeople — the National Affairs Conference on Judicial Reform, convened by President Tsai, is just such a process at national scale.
1-2. I learned this approach mostly from my predecessor Jaclyn Tsai, through her “call for help” during the g0v hackathon to build a crowd-sourced agenda setting system with the civil society.
1-3. My work as “channel” here is to help establishing an accountability trail, built from the initial input of individual experiences and feelings, all the way to decision-making and implementation.
2-1. To me, the process of such a reform needs to be normative as well. Here is a draft proposal from last year by 10 legislators, though it’s not put to vote during the session and thus has expired.
2-2. Law-level implementation, such as the Digital Communications Act proposed by the NCC, is currently ratifying the vTaiwan multistakeholder process in a normative form, for issues concerning governance over new digital technologies.
4-1. I think we’re still accelerating — whether it’s on an exponential or sigmoid trajectory remains to be seen (and acted on).
5-2. For official visits, we have a protocol too.