Strongly upvoted, but I specifically disagree with the suggestions on which group of people should be able to vote on things:
“High karma users” selects, at minimum, for people with lots of time to spend on the internet. This means it will be more accessible to e.g. rich people. It probably also selects for people who agree with most of the popular opinions in EA (although I might be a counterexample), which goes against diversity of thought.
“People admitted to EAG” lets the funders choose the people who’ll vote about their decisions.
In line with what (I think) happens in EA Germany and EA Czech Republic, I’d propose a much simpler criterion—membership in an organisation which requires a small yearly fee.
https://decidim.org/ seems like a natural fit for what the OP and you are suggesting. The app and the org can help in more participation when it comes to projects, more transparency when it comes to implementation and funding and you can gate certain features trough a membership fee as well.
Strongly upvoted, but I specifically disagree with the suggestions on which group of people should be able to vote on things:
“High karma users” selects, at minimum, for people with lots of time to spend on the internet. This means it will be more accessible to e.g. rich people. It probably also selects for people who agree with most of the popular opinions in EA (although I might be a counterexample), which goes against diversity of thought.
“People admitted to EAG” lets the funders choose the people who’ll vote about their decisions.
In line with what (I think) happens in EA Germany and EA Czech Republic, I’d propose a much simpler criterion—membership in an organisation which requires a small yearly fee.
https://decidim.org/ seems like a natural fit for what the OP and you are suggesting. The app and the org can help in more participation when it comes to projects, more transparency when it comes to implementation and funding and you can gate certain features trough a membership fee as well.