Updates

The ombudsman, as it stands, is a shark without teeth. It cannot even smell a scandal if it was bleeding before their eyes — can’t sense, can’t bite, can’t act, can’t fix. It’s a watchdog with no jaws. So let’s give it an upgrade or even better give the government such an upgrade that Ombudsman loses the necessity for their entire existence.

This isn’t some grand ideological revolution. It’s just a silly idea for a public ticket system. Silly, but powerful.

Imagine a civic ticket system — not buried in obscure forms, not locked in back-office email chains. Just like an internal help-desk, but for governance. Public, structured, traceable. And smart.

This is what it looks like.

Core Idea
Citizens should be able to report issues publicly — not buried in anonymous inboxes, not hidden behind “ongoing investigation” seals. People already talk about public issues. If people can talk about public issues with their friends, why can’t they track them together too?

A government ticket system could work just like internal systems in IT or customer service — but with a civic twist.

This is not a place for endless debate. It’s a structure to frame problem → proposal → response, cleanly and traceable.

This system proposes a transparent, iterative problem-solving interface where AI is used not to obscure, but to clarify.

The System: Public, AI-Structured, and Transparent

The system is made up of 4 stages — and yes, it uses AI — but only as a tool to help people sharpen what they’re already saying.

Every issue goes through this cycle:

1. Problem Description
a) Citizens submit an issue. b) The AI cleans up the language, consolidates overlapping inputs, and upgrades the coherence of the report. c) A public change-log shows the input that evolved the description — all steps visible, all input attributable.

2. Proposed Solution
a) Based on the refined problem description, the AI drafts a solution or possible action path. b) This is visible to the public as a formal response — no magic, just structured reasoning. c) This is not a decision. It’s a draft — structured logic, not authority. Only advice.

3. Critique Layer
a) Citizens respond to the proposed solution — a structured challenge to the proposal.. b) Their remarks are also structured by AI — not censored, but upgraded for clarity and grouped by theme or angle. c) Again, change-logs and input trails are visible. No anonymous edits. No hidden manipulations. d) in a sense this is the same as step 1 (problem description)

4. Upgraded Solution
a) The AI integrates valid critiques and proposes a refined version of the solution. b) This is the “feedback-reinforced” stage, where the system attempts synthesis, not endless argument loops.

All stages remain visible — including abandoned tickets, failed resolutions, and ongoing ones. This creates a living public record of issues and proposed governance responses.

This is the synthesis. 1 = 2 + 3 = 4.

Why This Matters

• It forces clarity and traceability. No more vague complaints floating in chaos.
• It turns public input into a collaborative upgrade process.
• It shows which tickets are being handled, stalled, ignored — in plain sight.
• It makes every AI edit accountable, not mysterious.
• It doesn’t replace the ombudsman — it arms them.

Business Model? Sure — But Keep It Public

Yes, this is a product. But no, it shouldn’t be commercialized. This is civic infrastructure. It belongs to the commons.

It could be sold to municipalities, NGOs, or transparency coalitions — but that defeats the purpose.

Build it, release it, and let it run at zero cost. The public has already paid for enough systems that don’t work. This one should.

The value lies not in monetization — but in legitimacy.

Expanded Use: From Complaint Board to Administrative Operating System

What starts as a feedback tool can evolve into a complete civic engine. The system can scale:

1. Reported Issue
2. Processed Issue (by a public servant or automated filter)
   • AI-generated remark on process adequacy (4-stages again)
3. Re-open option if resolution was insufficient (4-stages again)
4. Cross-department visibility and workflow mapping
   • The ticket can go through different departments and the work of each department remains visible.

Each issue flows like a case file, but it’s public-facing and structurally transparent. Departments can adopt the system internally. Citizens and officials see the same state of the case. Updates are traceable.

With enough refinement, this system could even approach pre-judicial arbitration or replace lower-level administrative courts — especially for predictable, repeatable types of disputes (benefits, housing, permit denials, etc.).

At some point a judge and lawyer can then bend over the case after it went through these 3 steps.

Design Philosophy

• Public by default.
• AI-enhanced, not AI-obscured.
• Built around iteration, not resolution-hiding.
• Input is traceable. Reasoning is legible. Logic is public.
• Not built to silence citizens with forms — but to cohere chaos into clarity.

Potential Impact:

If deployed at scale, this would:

• Reduce performative complaint culture (“I ranted online!”) in favor of traceable input.
• Provide oversight journalists and watchdogs with live case data.
• Offer civil servants a way to separate noise from signal.
• Create longitudinal accountability: we’d know what failed, what improved, and why.
• We can track government efficiency through details such as backlog and amount of re-opened cases

Final Thought

Let’s stop treating public concern like noise.

Let’s give it a ticket.

Let’s give the ombudsman jaws.

Give people a way to speak clearly. Let the problems stay visible. Let the fixes be criticized. Let the system evolve in full view.

Democracy doesn’t die in darkness — it suffocates in forms. We’ve normalized arbitrary bureaucracy and opaque complaint systems. But the technology to upgrade them exists. All we’re missing is the will — and the will can be crowd-sourced.

Written by Artorius Magnus

https://tinyurl.com/laconic-utopia World-Peace suggestions @250 articles highschool dropout-autodidact (unofficially 5+ PhD's).

Vanochtend hebben we de petitie ingediend bij wethouder Mario Jacobs tijdens de commissie leefbaarheid, ongeveer bij de 19e minuut, agendapunt 10. We zijn blij en tevreden over hoe de petitie is ontvangen en kunnen op steun van diverse politieke partijen rekenen.

Hans & Tanja zijn in 2015 op een ideale manier hun biologische melkveehouderij gestart: meer dan voldoende grond, een prettige samenwerking met de natuurbeheerders, een prachtlocatie, 60 prachtkoeien en een gezin dat er voor meer dan 100% voor ging. Alles wat ze hadden en hebben zit in hun boerderij.

Het is vandaag maandag 5 maart 2018 en er zijn 743 handtekeningen binnen. Geef vooral aan je collega's de link door van deze petitie.

De vierjarige Deedee uit Waddinxveen mag in Nederland bij haar overgrootoma blijven. Ze heeft 22 februari volledig onverwacht haar verblijfsvergunning gekregen en wordt niet uitgezet naar Liberia, het geboorteland van haar ouders.

Op 21 februari werd ook bekend gemaakt in de gemeenteraad dat door de behandeling minstens zes maanden langer zou duren na een brief van haar advocaat.

We zijn erg blij met alle steunbetuigingen en heel dankbaar dat Deedee in Nederland mag blijven!

Bron:

• Raadsvergadering gemeente Waddinxveen 21-02-18, (audio) op 4 min 45 sec

• AD (22-02-2018) Verblijfsvergunning 4-jarige Deedee

REACTIE VAN DE PETITIONARIS

We zijn erg blij met alle steunbetuigingen en heel dankbaar dat Deedee in Nederland mag blijven!

Met vriendelijke groet,

Clazien Sonneveld, Directeur Koningin Beatrixschool

EINDE REACTIE .

Elke maand komen er nog steeds mensen bijeen om te brainstormen over hoe we zo gauw mogelijk 40.000 handtekeningen verzamelen. Als je daar ook bij wilt zijn stuur dan even een mailtje of een bericht op Facebook.

Beste ondertekenaar van de petitie Red het Oranjeveld,

In tijden van verkiezingen is het voor vele bewoners van de gemeente Heusden een lastige keuze om een juiste beslissing te maken waar uw stem naar toe gaat.

Namens onze actiecomité "Red het oranjeveld" willen wij nogmaals onze dank uit spreken aan de volgende partijen: Heusden Transparant, Gemeente Belangen, D66 en CDA die enkele maanden geleden hard hebben gestreden voor het behoud van het Oranjeveld. Zonder hun hulp was de kans zeer groot geweest dat deze mooie groene plek in Drunen ruimte had moeten maken voor nog meer nieuwbouw.

Mocht u nog geen keuze hebben kunnen maken waar uw stem heen gaat, denk dan nogmaals aan deze partijen en hun leden.

De vierjarige Deedee uit Waddinxveen mag in Nederland bij haar overgrootoma blijven. Ze heeft vanmiddag volledig onverwacht haar verblijfsvergunning gekregen.

De gemeente West Frŷsland die in april 2017 voorstelde om de lijn vanaf Noord, zelfs helemaal door te trekken naar Hoorn! Het is nog niet bekend of hij dan via Broek in Waterland, Monnickendam, Edam/Volendam en Oosthuizen zal rijden, of via Purmerend. Wellicht komen beide routes er.