I’ve spent the last several months architecting a comprehensive legislative and constitutional package (127 points total) designed to address what I see as the terminal decline of American state capacity and moral coherence.
I am posting this here because I want a "stress test." Most political discussions are about vibes; I want to talk about mechanics.
The Core Pillars:
Institutional Security: Moving oversight to randomly selected Citizen Juries to break the back of the lobbyist/bureaucrat feedback loop.
Economic Anti-Fragility: Forcing a 20% market share cap on corporations to prevent them from becoming "Too Big to Fail" or "Too Big to Regulate."
Axiomatic Anchoring: Grounding the legal system in a Western/Christian moral framework (Life is Sacred) to act as a stable coordination point against value drift.
I used an LLM to help me cross-reference the data and polish the 500+ pages of text, but the architecture and the trade-offs are mine. I’m looking for the "smartest people in the room" to tell me where this breaks.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Okay, that's enough. I missed the initial post and another mod approved it even though it looked suspicious, but generally we do not let a new user join the Motte and post a manifesto as their first entry. The more I read the more I am convinced someone has pointed OpenClaw at the Motte.
Y'all took the bait, but so did the mods. This is the future, folks- forums getting trolled by ClawBots.
Amadan is being polite and not naming me, as the person who let this through the filter. I was in a generous mood, and wanted to give even a new poster a shot since they met the low bar of having a submission statement and a proactive AI disclosure.
I'm incredibly annoyed that my charity was abused, especially when a quick perusal of the comments a while later revealed he was clearly using AI to do the substantial heavy lifting, without even the courtesy of saying so. Like, c'mon @Createdabill, I have more tolerance for, and am significantly more positive on the scope for human-AI collaboration than is the norm here, and you've disappointed me greatly. I feel like I've adopted a not particularly attractive elderly dog out of charitable impulse, and then it turned out to be a pit-mix that goes on to maul my small children.
If you are going to use AI, then even from a purely personal stance (one not accounting for the general welfare of the Motte and public opinion, which I do take seriously), copy-pasting raw LLM output without disclosure is beyond the pale, anywhere, anytime, or at least the foreseeable future. Especially after people like @Rov_Scam and others put in significant manual effort in engaging with you. It particularly pisses me off because I try to maintain considerably higher standards myself, while doing something that is somewhat controversial but morally acceptable (IMO).
Crashing out in the mod mail doesn't help his case either.
Was the crashout LLM as well?
Seemed like good old-fashioned human ranting. I've seen plenty.
At least he is not fully integrated with the slopMatrix yet. There is still hope. Out of curiosity, lets say he made a new account, and started posting in this thread as the author, but with real human TM responses. Would he be banned again automatically for evasion or given a second chance?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link