Pondering how democratic tools & rules are only as good as they can reflect a group's consensus.
The #benevolentdictator model in open systems, ie FOSS & now fedi instances, despite problems (centralisation, burnout), remains compelling. It could also be a Team with control (as with post-BDFL projects like CiviCRM) – the key is decision-makers have to reflect consensus. Because it's all open, they know the community can depart/fork with relatively low cost (unlike the Zuskian/techbro dictator).
With 51% and then 56% of #socialcoop voting to #defederate Meta, but a block & a bylaw mean we'll actually federate or vote again, reminds me how #digitalsociocracy can empower those with the most free time (ie not working single parents), those who use English best (ie not maj. world), or those who can exploit rules & tools to suit themselves. In the end many donate time yet decisions often stay unmade. Or when they do, no-one takes ownership of them, so it's harder to cleanup/fix if a mistake.