Hi Agent86,
I guess we are talking two very different things, then. The primary use case I am pushing towards is how can the experts (i.e. the Bytemaster and others) get the entire dumb herd do something like allow something like dilution to support a marketing push, while losing the fewest possible sheep. You need to be able to rapidly educate (and get intelligent expert feedback from) the entire herd, and it is also critically important that you be able to measure how effective your communication is, what works, what doesn't, how many people are not yet on board, why (real time, concisely and quantitatively for millions of people), and what would be required to get them on board. It all needs to be very flexible, constantly being negotiated and changing, so everyone has visibility into the current state of the consensus (both expert and popular) All this stuff needs to be much more than just meaningless 'non binding' stuff, so there is certainty and trust. it is not good for everyone to sell everything when there is so much uncertainly while we work at building consensus, and guessing at how much we may or may not have.
It sounds like the 'non binding' stuff you guys are talking about is very different than this, and really has nothing to do with governance or a "constitution" or anything, which is the topic of this thread?
Brent