For me, as an Australian, I liken them to the beginnings
of a proposed Living Bill of Rights. That would
provide the ability for each generation to have
equal input into the present and the future
management and running of our country. Rather than
us all being shoe-horned into beliefs and systems
that were devised and were suitable more than a
hundred years ago.
Answer
Community Notes, as a feature on platforms like X (formerly Twitter), indeed offers a unique approach to moderating
and clarifying content by crowdsourcing context from users. Here's how this might resonate with your thoughts on a
Living Bill of Rights:
On Community Notes:
Dynamic and Evolving Information: Community Notes allow for real-time correction and context addition to posts, much
like how a Living Bill of Rights would adapt to contemporary societal values and issues. This means misinformation
or incomplete information can be addressed as public understanding evolves, paralleling how laws and rights might be
updated with each generation's input.
Community Engagement: Just as you envision a Living Bill of Rights involving community participation, Community
Notes engage users directly in the content moderation process. This fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility
over the information ecosystem, akin to citizens having a say in their governance.
Challenges of Bias and Accuracy: While Community Notes aim to provide clarity, they are not without flaws. The
reliability can vary based on who contributes and how notes are rated. Similarly, a Living Bill of Rights would need
mechanisms to ensure that amendments or interpretations are not swayed by temporary public moods or biases,
requiring careful design to balance democracy with stability.
Education and Awareness: Both concepts require an informed populace. For Community Notes to be effective, users need
to understand how to contribute or assess the notes for accuracy. Similarly, for a Living Bill of Rights to work,
there must be an ongoing public education about legal rights and responsibilities.
Potential for Misuse or Overreach: There's always the risk that such systems could be manipulated for political or
personal gain. Your idea of a Living Bill of Rights would need safeguards against this, much like Community Notes
must have checks to prevent the system from being gamed.
Cultural Adaptation: In Australia, where you draw this parallel, there's a cultural emphasis on fairness and
equality. Both Community Notes and a dynamic legal framework could serve to ensure these values are reflected in
both online discourse and national policy.
Your vision of a Living Bill of Rights seems to aim at ensuring that laws and societal agreements are not static but
grow with societal changes, much like Community Notes aim to keep information current and contextual. However, both
systems highlight the need for robust mechanisms to ensure they serve their intended purpose without becoming tools
for further division or misinformation.
Would you like to delve deeper into how these concepts could be practically implemented or discuss potential
pitfalls in either system?
Lets delve deeper into how these concepts could be practically implemented
Answer
Here's a deeper look into how both Community Notes and the concept of a Living Bill of Rights could be practically
implemented:
Community Notes Implementation:
User Education:
Training Modules: Develop educational resources or tutorials on how to write effective, factual notes. This could
include lessons on sourcing, neutrality, and the importance of context.
Awareness Campaigns: Regular campaigns to inform users about the presence and purpose of Community Notes,
encouraging broader participation.
Algorithmic Oversight:
Transparency: Publicly share how the algorithm that selects and displays notes works, ensuring it's not biased
towards certain viewpoints or demographics.
Rating System: Implement a system where notes are rated for accuracy and usefulness by a broad segment of the user
base, possibly with checks to avoid spam or manipulation.
Community Involvement:
Diverse Contributors: Encourage contributions from a wide demographic to counterbalance any single perspective
dominating the narrative.
Feedback Loop: Allow users to challenge or provide counter-notes, creating a dialogue rather than a one-sided
annotation.
Moderation and Quality Control:
Human Oversight: Have a team or community of moderators who can step in for notes that are controversial or
potentially harmful, ensuring they meet certain standards.
Evolutionary Updates:
Regular Reviews: Update the system based on user feedback and observed outcomes to refine the process.
Living Bill of Rights Implementation:
Constitutional Framework:
Amendment Mechanism: Establish clear, perhaps periodic, mechanisms for amendment that require significant consensus,
balancing ease of change with stability.
Public Consultation: Require public forums, consultations, or referendums to gauge public opinion on proposed
changes.
Education and Civic Engagement:
National Curriculum: Include teachings on the Bill of Rights within the educational system to foster understanding
and participation.
Civic Participation Programs: Encourage public involvement through service or advisory roles in the legislative
process.
Institutional Support:
Independent Commission: Set up a body responsible for reviewing rights in light of current societal needs, with
diverse representation to avoid bias.
Legislative Review: Regular legislative sessions or special committees dedicated to reviewing and updating rights.
Technology Utilization:
Digital Platforms: Use technology for gathering public input, similar to how Community Notes operates, allowing for
a broad collection of opinions and suggestions.
Transparency Tools: Public databases or platforms where the evolution of rights can be tracked, discussed, and
understood by the populace.
Cultural Integration:
Cultural Events: Use cultural events or national days to discuss rights, ensuring they're part of the national
conversation and identity.
Safeguards Against Abuse:
Checks and Balances: Ensure no single political or social group can dominate amendments.
This might involve supermajorities, veto powers, or other balancing mechanisms.
Both systems would need to be agile to respond to changes but stable enough to maintain societal order. The
practical implementation would require a balance of technology, education, public engagement, and robust legal
frameworks. For Australia, this could mean integrating these concepts into the political system while respecting the
cultural ethos of fairness and inclusivity.
Would you like to explore any specific aspect of these implementations further, or perhaps discuss potential
challenges unique to Australia's context?
Tell me about potential challenges unique to Australia's context
Australia's unique context presents several challenges when considering the implementation of concepts like
Community Notes or a Living Bill of Rights:
Geographical and Demographic Challenges:
Population Distribution: With a significant portion of the population concentrated on the eastern seaboard, and
vast, sparsely populated areas elsewhere, ensuring equitable representation and participation in systems like a
Living Bill of Rights or even in the context of Community Notes could be challenging. Rural and remote voices might
be underrepresented.
Indigenous Rights: A Living Bill of Rights must intricately balance modern legal principles with the rights of
Australia's First Nations peoples, acknowledging and integrating Indigenous legal and cultural systems. This
requires careful negotiation and respect for sovereignty and self-determination.
Cultural and Historical Context:
Constitutional Monarchy: Australia's constitutional framework as part of the Commonwealth and its relationship with
the British monarchy adds layers of complexity to constitutional amendments or the introduction of a new bill of
rights. Any change would need to navigate this relationship.
Cultural Diversity: With a multicultural population, ensuring that any system or policy respects and represents
diverse cultural values and beliefs is crucial. This diversity can both enrich and complicate the dialogue around
rights.
Political and Legal System:
Lack of a Federal Bill of Rights: Australia lacks a federal bill of rights, which means introducing one would
require navigating through state rights versus federal powers, potentially facing resistance from states with
different political climates or priorities.
Referendum Processes: Changes to the constitution, which might be necessary for a Living Bill of Rights, require
referendums that historically have a low success rate in Australia. This cultural resistance to constitutional
change could hinder progress.
Digital Divide:
Internet Access: For Community Notes to be effective, widespread internet access is necessary. In remote areas of
Australia, where internet connectivity can be poor, participation in digital systems could be limited, skewing the
demographics of who contributes and benefits from such systems.
Media Influence:
Media Landscape: Australia's media is concentrated in the hands of a few entities, which could influence public
discourse around new rights systems, potentially skewing public opinion or misrepresenting community
sentiments.
Legislative and Public Engagement:
Bipartisan Support: Both concepts would require broad political support to be implemented effectively. Australia's
political landscape has often been polarized on issues of rights and freedoms, making consensus difficult.
Public Trust in Institutions: There's a noted skepticism towards government and institutions, which could affect
participation in or acceptance of new systems aimed at managing rights or moderating online content.
Implementation Specifics:
Community Notes: The timezone difference and smaller population size relative to global platforms might mean that
Australian contributions to Community Notes could be less visible or influential. There could be a lag in moderation
or note approval due to these factors.
Living Bill of Rights: The very concept might be at odds with the Australian preference for parliamentary
sovereignty over judicial activism, meaning any system would need to be designed to work within this cultural and
legal preference.
Addressing these challenges would involve extensive consultation, education campaigns, ensuring inclusivity in every
step of the process, and perhaps a phased approach to implementation to allow for adjustments based on feedback and
outcomes.
When reading, "Addressing these challenges would involve extensive consultation, education campaigns,
ensuring
inclusivity in every step of the process, and perhaps a phased approach to implementation to allow for
adjustments
based on feedback and outcomes.”. I saw that this would not prove to be workable, as it simply leaves it
open for
coaching to align with present day biases and failings. I tend toward a set of criteria akin to the UN's
Universal
and other Declarations as these set boundaries and limitations that we would need to work within. X's
blanket "Free
Speech" while making a nice noise leaves open many opportunities to abuse that privilege. Free Speech with
no
considered boundaries is akin to anarchy and does not offer guidance to youth and those wanting to
participate.
Answer
Your perspective raises valid points about the balance between freedom, rights, and responsibility. Here's how your
concerns could be addressed in the context of both a Living Bill of Rights and Community Notes:
Living Bill of Rights with Set Criteria:
Adoption of International Standards: By aligning with established international human rights documents like the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, you set a foundation for rights that transcends local biases or contemporary
political climates. These declarations provide a framework of rights and responsibilities that are recognized
globally.
Criteria for Amendments:
Non-regression Clause: Any amendment must not lessen the rights already recognized; it should either expand them or
clarify without diminishing existing protections.
Human Rights Impact Assessments: Before any amendment is passed, an assessment could be conducted to ensure it
aligns with international human rights standards.
Education and Public Awareness:
Integrate these international standards into educational curricula to ensure that the populace understands both the
rights they are entitled to and the responsibilities they carry. This education would also include how these rights
are protected within the Australian context.
Judicial Oversight: A strong judicial system interpreting these rights within the bounds of international law could
prevent the drift towards contemporary biases.
Community Notes with Boundaries:
Moderation Guidelines:
Implement clear, publicly available guidelines based on principles like those in the UN declarations to ensure that
notes are not just free speech but informed, respectful, and contributing to the truth.
User Accountability:
While anonymity might be maintained for privacy, there could be systems in place where users are held accountable
for notes that incite harm, spread misinformation, or violate the platform's interpretation of free speech
boundaries.
Educational Tools:
Provide resources for users on how to engage with Community Notes in a way that respects free speech while also
upholding other values like respect, accuracy, and non-discrimination.
Feedback and Correction Mechanisms:
Allow for community or expert review where notes can be challenged if they fall outside the established boundaries,
ensuring that the system evolves in a way that remains beneficial and fair.
Cultural Context:
Recognize that free speech in Australia might need cultural nuances, especially considering Indigenous perspectives
on freedom of expression and community harmony.
Legal Recourse:
Users should have a pathway to report or seek redress if notes lead to harm, defamation, or other legal issues,
balancing free speech with legal accountability.
Your observation about free speech without boundaries leading to anarchy is pertinent. Both in the physical and
digital realms, rights need to be balanced with responsibilities and clear guidelines. In this way, freedom of
speech can coexist with respect for individual and collective rights, providing guidance and structure to those
engaging with these systems. This approach would aim to protect free expression while preventing its misuse,
something that would also resonate with the youth and new participants in civic spaces.
2023 Findings in Spain found that 0.6% of the population of Spain had been sexually abused by Roman Catholic
priests and laity.
Up to 50 million alive on any day who have been raped or abused by Catholic clergy &/or Catholic laity
Current world population is 8 billion - 0.6% = 48 million alive today who are likely to have been raped by
Catholics globally.
The
church protected the perpetrators, not the victims
"This is a matter for the church and I respect the internal judgements of the church. I don't stand
outside the church and provide them with public lectures in terms of how they should behave. I've noted
carefully what his Holiness has said in the United States. Obviously that was a source of great comfort
and healing in the United States. I'm like all Australians very much looking forward to what the Pope
has to say here in Australia as well, as I am to my own conversation with the Pope later this
morning."
Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, 17 July 2008. more
If you found this information to be of assistance please don't forget to donate so
that we can
extend these information pages which are focused on providing knowledge and information to survivor/victims
on their Human Rights with justice, compassion and empathy at the fore along with sound knowledge of Human
Biology and Psychology, Human Evolution and Neuroscience. Information is not provided as legal or
professional advice; it is provided as general information only and requires that you validate any
information via your own legal or other professional service providers.
Wednesday, 22 June 2022 - I may not have this down syntax, word and letter perfect or
with
absolute precision in every aspect; however time and the evidence will show that I am closer to the truth than
any religion has been or will likely be.
Let history be the standard by which that is measured.
Youtube - listen to Commissioner Bob
Atkinson get it wrong - again
The Commissioner informs us that the clergy sexual abuse issue was all over and that it had only been a
small statistical glitch around the year 2000. History shows this to have been a display of absolute ignorance
on the issue ...
Makarrata : a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.
The Uluru
Statement from the Heart. See Yours, mine and Australia's
children. I acknowledge the
Traditional People and their Ownership of Australia.
#FAQyMe #FAQyMeGene trauma informed human rights justice failed institutions UN Convention on Human Rights Rights of the Child and a Bill of Rights for Australia future evidence resilience not providing or representing a secular Australia autodidact Constitutional Reform human rights Living Constitution Constitution Field Guide
Hegemony: The authority, dominance, and influence of one group, nation, or society over another group, nation, or society; typically through cultural, economic, or political means.
.
Recent: 
Must reads on 
Mother and baby home survivors on redress delay:
'They are playing a game of wait and die'
Consultants
reported more than 520 conflicts of interest during audit of Australian aged care
2024 is the year of Survivor's High Court challenge of the legitimacy of the Catholic Church and its religion on
the basis of its primary allegiance and obedience to a foreign state.
Were you like so many others born into a constitutionally
protected God based death and rape culture?
About and bits
IP Geolocation
by
geoPlugin