1. Purpose
This document outlines how Pond and Consensus must interact to ensure that problem definitions are clear, unbiased, and easily understood before an issue moves forward in the Canuckduck ecosystem. This process is essential to avoid ambiguity and confusion, as seen in past referendum issues like the Daylight Saving Time vote in Alberta.
2. Why Problem Definition Matters
- Ensures clarity in public discourse to prevent misinterpretation.
- Reduces the likelihood of contradictory or unintended voting outcomes.
- Helps voters make fully informed decisions with accurate information.
- Prevents issues with vague wording from advancing prematurely.
3. Interaction Between Pond & Consensus
Step 1: Open Discussion in Pond
- Users freely discuss and refine the issue in an unstructured manner.
- Different viewpoints and potential misinterpretations are surfaced.
- Moderators or active contributors highlight common points of confusion.
Step 2: Consensus Pre-Vote on Problem Definition
- Once an issue gains traction, Consensus is used to finalize the wording of the problem statement.
- Voters are presented with clear, structured options for defining the problem.
- The highest-voted definition is locked before escalation to Flightplan.
Step 3: Verification & Clarity Review
- Before an issue progresses, the system verifies that:
- The wording is explicit and unambiguous.
- The question does not contain double negatives or misleading phrasing.
- The issue statement is easily understood by a broad audience.
- If flagged for confusion, the issue returns to Pond for refinement before being re-submitted to Consensus.
Step 4: Issue Escalation to Flightplan
- Only once the problem definition is locked and verified can the issue move to Flightplan for structured solution development.
- Flightplan proposals must align with the clearly defined issue statement to avoid misinterpretation.
4. Safeguards Against Misleading or Confusing Questions
Pre-Consensus Reality Check – A checkpoint where users can flag problematic wording.
AI-Assisted Clarity Review – Optional future feature to detect confusing language or logical inconsistencies.
Public Explanation Requirement – A summary of what each option means must be included with all votes.
Historical Reference Tagging – Allows users to compare similar past issues and prevent repeated confusion.
5. Conclusion
By ensuring Pond and Consensus work together to refine problem definitions, Canuckduck creates a transparent, well-informed decision-making process that prevents voter confusion and unintended outcomes. This method strengthens public trust, enhances issue clarity, and improves the quality of governance discussions.