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).

De westhavendam met zijn mooie vuurtoren en het zo bekende hokje, waar door de petitie ondertekenaars zo moedig voor is gestreden, is gebaat bij meer bescherming. Daarom ook de oproep aan het gemeentebestuur om de westhavendam na renovatie en herstel tot gemeentelijk monument te verklaren.

Foar de beslissers. (Ut Eintsje)

Ut wetter slagt tsjin stien en pealen De kjelt docht sear tot op'e huud En wyn die kâlder is dan'k togt hie Makket net un noflike luud

Toch wol ik op dit plakje bliuwe Ut plakje wer de leafde wie Wer jonkjes mei de famkes buoten Un frommes soms te wachtsjen stie

Dot plak dot is nog steeds ut Eintsje Hjir komt men faaks de Lemmer yn Ut beaken skynt nog op ut hokje Fynt men sa de lemmer blyn

De leite socht, makket de wyn Ta plak fan hoedjen op'e daam K'sjoch ut ferliene no wer foar my Hjir wie uus heit do my de faam

"As tiiden tiiden hebbe" Tink don un de skiedenis Wont wat fuort is, is ferlern no Pos don fielst echt wol ut gemis

Wietze de Haan.

Persbericht verstuurd dat deze petitie is gestart. Tevens staan er meer acties op het programma. Zoals gesprekken met haarlem kennermerland, een vastgoed bedrijf een hfc haarlem shirt brengen naar het red bull hoofdkantoor en gesprek met Speren voor spieren voor een benefietwedstrijd. Tip: heb realistische verwachtingen en wees aangenaam verrast als iets lukt! We doen onze stinkende best. Onderteken deze petitie en vertel iedereen het zelfde te doen! like de fb pagina.

Geweldig!!!!!! Woensdag 19 april is tijdens de commissievergadering (bestuur) unaniem besloten om de petitie te steunen, en de thuisteelt en gebruik van medicinale cannabis mogelijk te gaan maken via een convenant en artsenverklaring. De burgemeester gaat zo spoedig mogelijk contact opnemen met justitie en andere partijen, en wil in gesprek met de gemeente Tilburg om te kijken hoe dit binnen Schagen het beste geregeld kan worden.

Het plan voor deze gele ballen is van de baan, er is al lang niets meer over vernomen.

Voor iedereen die dit bericht leest. De Raad van Waalwijk biedt iedereen op Donderdag 1 Juni a.s. de kans om met hen in discussie te gaan over de ontwikkelingsplannen van de 'De Akkerlanen'. Dit is een oproep om daar massaal gevolg aan te geven. Geef je op via de Griffie van de Gemeente Waalwijk (griffie@waalwijk.nl) om op 1 Juni a.s.

http://afmp.nl/eindbod-defensie

Hier kunt u alles lezen over het eindbod van de minister...

Mensen laat van u horen..

Phieuw!!! 1000 handtekeningen in 24 uur! Samen zijn we sterker! Bedankt!

Maar we zijn er nog lang niet! DEEL de volgende link: https://opoesientjemoetblijven.petities.nl Bedankt!.