You, the petitioner

Updates

A Ticket System for Government (Or: Let’s Finally Give the Ombudsman Teeth)

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).

Petitie voor de teruggave van collegegeld!

Deze petitie is opgericht, zodat de studenten, die in het schooljaar 2020-2021 online onderwijs hebben gekregen, hun collegegeld terugkrijgen!.

2020-10-17 | Petition Compensatie collegegeld

de angel uit de polarisatie: een soort intelligente semi-lockdown

De spoedwet heeft enorme polarisatie veroorzaakt, en dit wordt alleen maar erger nu dat een plicht is aangekondigd voor niet-werkende mondkapjes.

Bij goedemorgen nederland van 12 oktober, presenteerde Erik-Jan Vlieger een interessant tijdslot plan om iedereen zijn vrijheid terug te kunnen geven, en toch veilige bewegingsvrijheid te geven aan mensen uit hoog-risico groepen.

Als dit nog op een of andere manier in de wet geamendeerd zou kunnen worden, zou dit wel eens de angel uit de polarisatie kunnen trekken.

vanaf minuut 08:30 Een soort intelligente semi-lockdown .

2020-10-17 | Petition Stop de corona noodwet

NRC: ‘Cultuursubsidie werd door willekeur een zooitje’

De verdeling van subsidie voor de cultuursector is oneerlijk en moet over, betoogt Zora Duvnjak (PvdA), lid van de stadsdeelcommissie Amsterdam-West.

lees verder .

2020-10-17 | Petition Red Museum Het Schip

"More beautiful than the palace of the king"

[This is the English translaton of the opinion piece in NRC.]

In 1923, the Japanese architect Sutemi Horiguchi visited the Netherlands and was amazed at the fact that the workers' houses in the Netherlands were more beautiful than the king's palace. The following year he published a book in Japan on Dutch architecture with a lot of attention to the houses that were built in the romantic and expressionist style of the Amsterdam School, mainly by housing corporations.

+Read more...

All over the world there was admiration for social housing in the Netherlands. The inspirer of the Amsterdam School movement, architect Michel de Klerk, was also called the “Rembrandt of architects”. In Amsterdam it was the social democratic councilor Floor Wibaut who made a case here. He felt that the workers should be elevated by becoming acquainted with art and culture.

Until today there is great interest in social housing and the Amsterdam School architecture in the world. It was mainly foreigners who published about the art and architecture of the Amsterdam School in the 1970s and 1980s. A few years ago it was The Getty Foundation in Los Angeles that contributed financially to the restaurant of housing complex Het Schip.

But is this interest also there in the Netherlands? With the support of housing corporations and the municipality of Amsterdam, Museum Het Schip started a few years ago in Het Schip to promote interest in this Dutch heritage. An important reason for the support of the municipality was the aim to spread tourists more over the city. The museum started in a small post office and was subsequently converted into a museum home. Four years ago, a former school building could also be involved. Mayor Eberhard van der Laan officially opened this extension. The extra museum space made it possible to organize exhibitions about the art of the Amsterdam School and the underlying ideals to help people find a good and beautiful home. The museum has a permanent exhibition and there are also changing exhibitions that place art and architecture in a broader context. There is currently an exhibition about the utopian German architect Bruno Taut. He was heavily influenced by Dutch architecture and built a neighborhood in Berlin in the style of the Amsterdam School: Schillerpark.

Although the name suggests otherwise, the Amsterdam School is not just an Amsterdam affair. Almost every town or village in the Netherlands has buildings from the twenties of the last century that were built in this style. In addition, there are buildings in Indonesia and even in Kemerovo in Siberia. The digital Platform Wendingen, set up by the museum, is busy collecting all these buildings on the internet. In recent years, thanks to Museum Het Schip, interest in the Amsterdam School has grown significantly. Many people now see how beautiful the neighborhood they live in is. In addition, the museum provides inspiration for architects and public housing providers. The principle of designing beautiful homes for people with low incomes is reflected in Dutch architecture.

The advisory committee of the Amsterdam Fund for the Arts (AFK), which had to assess the subsidy application from Museum Het Schip, was therefore very positive and advised allocating the requested amount. Unfortunately this did not happen. Instead, the museum received a substantial discount due to the lack of sufficient financial resources. As a result, the museum has an annual gap of 147,000 euros in its budget. This is not feasible for the museum, because the museum already obtains 65% from its own income. It is also impossible to cut back, because the fixed costs will continue and the museum heritage must be well cared for. Friends of the museum have therefore started a petition in support.

Alice Roegholt

2020-10-17 | Petition Red Museum Het Schip

Urgent: Laatste kans voor het referendum.

Aanstaande donderdag komt de omgevingsverordening aan de orde in de Statenvergadering. Naar pas nu blijkt, is daarna ook geen referendum of inspraak meer mogelijk. Wij hebben tot uiterlijk a.s.

+Read more...

maandag 19-10-2020 18.00 u. de tijd om met minimaal 500 geldige handtekeningen (mag digitaal) een referendumaanvraag te doen. Onderteken nogmaals met uitgebreide personalia om de referendumaanvraag te ondersteunen. Bij voorbaat dank.

2020-10-17 | Petition Geen windmolens in Noord-Holland

Help ons met nog 16.000 stemmen!

Beste ondertekenaars,

Wij kunnen jullie niet genoeg bedanken voor het ondersteunen van onze petitie ‘Vergoeding van explantatie borstprotheses’. Wij zijn hier heel blij mee en het geeft aan dat veel mensen vinden dat de politiek hier nu echt wat aan moet gaan doen.

+Read more...

Inmiddels staat de teller op ruim 23.000. Dat gaat de goede kant op, maar we zijn er nog niet. Met nog 16.000 extra ondertekeningen kunnen wij het onderwerp zo snel mogelijk in de Tweede Kamer krijgen. Hopelijk komt er dan voor het kerstreces duidelijkheid voor iedereen die ziek is of dreigt te worden door borstprotheses.

Daarom vragen wij jullie de petitie door te sturen in je naaste omgeving (familie, vrienden, kennissen) zodat de Tweede Kamer met 40.000 stemmen niet meer om deze problematiek heen kan en actie gaat ondernemen.

haalslechteborstprothesesterug.petities.nl

Dank alvast namens de organisatoren:

Jamie Crafoord - Calm Your Tits

Elvire - SVS Meldpunt Klachten Siliconen

analyse van de wereldwijde cijfers in relatie tot de genomen maatregelen en andere factoren

Een site met een uitgebreide analyse van de wereldwijde cijfers in relatie tot de genomen maatregelen en andere factoren.

coronavirus-de-missende-grafiek

Hopelijk nemen eerste kamerleden en beleidsmakers hier nog kennis van, zodat we kunnen voorkomen dat ‘het nieuwe normaal’ tot in de oneindigheid aan de burgers kan worden opgelegd via de spoedwet. De wet moet nog de eerste kamer, dus er is nog kans om het tegen te houden. .

2020-10-16 | Petition Stop de corona noodwet

Naar de duizend!

Het is duidelijk dat onze petitie ‘Westroute Nee! geweldig veel steun krijgt. Zo’n 700 plaatsgenoten hebben hun handtekening al gezet! Logisch toch, het plan is te bizar voor woorden! Nog ruim veertien dagen hebben we, en wat zou het mooi zijn als we dan met duizend handtekeningen naar de gemeente zouden kunnen gaan! Kortom: we gaan voor de duizend! Zegt het dus voort!.