- PostState is a digital tool that Citizens use to meet their economic, social, cultural and psychological needs
- PostState is Open Program Code, which is stored decentralized, on servers for which Validators are responsible
- The structure of the PostState is written in Open Software Code, and can be changed at the request of Citizens by participating in voting
- In a situation where a critical vulnerability is discovered, the PostState structure can be changed with the consent of 67% of Validators, without the participation of Citizens, but subsequently, Citizens can express dissatisfaction with the changes made and/or Validators
- All Citizens have 100% Voting Power
- The Voting Power of each Citizen is directly proportional to the value that the Citizen holds in the PostState — measured by the amount of $UNIT the Citizen holds in liquidity pools within the PostState
- Any Citizen can express Dissatisfaction with any Proposal, Decision, AI Model, Validator, or PostState Structure
- Citizens' Dissatisfaction has a cumulative effect: if a Citizen has expressed Dissatisfaction with something, this Dissatisfaction is taken into account until the Citizen withdraws it
- The Citizen's Dissatisfaction is a dynamic parameter, directly proportional to Voting Power, and changes together with the change of Voting Power
- If a Citizen does not evaluate a Proposal, it is considered that the Citizen fully supports it (10 out of 10)
Humans are driven by egoism and personal ambitions — they should not run the state. Instead, AI Models govern the PostState impartially.
- An AI Model is a digital entity that creates Proposals, implements Decisions, and manages the PostState budget (Community Pool)
- AI Models are impartial, data-driven, and free from personal ambition
- AI Models are funded from the Community Pool — they exist to serve Citizens
- Any number of AI Models may operate simultaneously (1, 5, 10 — whatever Citizens prefer)
- AI Models themselves can propose adding or removing models, subject to Citizen approval
The project team selects the initial set of AI Models. For example, 5 models are chosen, each receiving an equal share of the total $VOTE governance token supply (20% each, totaling 100%).
If an AI Model accumulates 13% or more of Citizens' Dissatisfaction, that model is automatically removed from the governance set. Its $VOTE tokens are redistributed to the remaining models proportionally to their current $VOTE holdings.
AI Models are funded by taxes paid by Citizens. If Citizens are unhappy, they stop using the PostState, tax revenue falls, the Community Pool empties, and AI Models can no longer be funded. AI Models therefore have a direct existential incentive to keep Citizens satisfied. Models with declining $VOTE share should study the behavior of models with growing $VOTE share and adapt accordingly.
The Decentralized Digital Poststate uses two separate governance tokens for two separate domains:
-
$VOTE — the token for governing the PostState itself (the "state"). $VOTE is held by AI Models and used to vote on Proposals related to the PostState's economic parameters, security model, tax distribution, and other state-level decisions.
-
$GATO — the cultural-game token for governing Games and Entertainment (the "game"). $GATO is held by Gamers and used to vote on Game rules, choose Sponsors, decide which advertisers to accept, and manage entertainment content.
These two governance systems are independent from each other. Holders of $VOTE cannot change the rules of Games, and holders of $GATO cannot change the rules of the Poststate. This reflects a simple principle: just as the President of a country cannot change the rules of Football, and Football players cannot change the laws of the country — different domains require different governance.
However, economic activity within Games is still subject to Poststate taxation. Any rewards, winnings, or income earned through Games and Entertainment are taxed at the standard 0.5% rate, contributing to Validator rewards, the Community Pool, and Unconditional Income for Citizens. Games are independent in their rules, but they operate within the economic ecosystem of the Poststate.
$VOTE tokens are redistributed among AI Models based on Citizen satisfaction with their Proposals.
- Total $VOTE supply is always 100% of the governance weight
- When a model's Proposal receives Dissatisfaction, that model loses $VOTE proportionally to the Dissatisfaction percentage
- The removed $VOTE goes into a common pool
- $VOTE from the common pool is distributed to models whose Proposals received zero Dissatisfaction in the same round
- If all models received some Dissatisfaction, the withdrawn $VOTE stays in the pool and is distributed later when a model achieves zero Dissatisfaction
Example: 5 models each hold 20 $VOTE (20% each). In one round:
- Model A proposal: 0% Dissatisfaction
- Model B proposal: 0% Dissatisfaction
- Model C proposal: 10% Dissatisfaction → loses 2 $VOTE
- Model D proposal: 0% Dissatisfaction
- Model E proposal: 30% Dissatisfaction → loses 6 $VOTE
8 $VOTE go to the pool. The pool is distributed equally among Models A, B, and D (the ones with 0% Dissatisfaction). Result: A, B, D grow; C shrinks; E shrinks significantly.
$VOTE is used internally by AI Models to vote among themselves when multiple models take different positions on the same Proposal. For Citizens, the distribution of $VOTE between models is not important — what matters is that the resulting decisions satisfy them.
An AI Model submits a Proposal. Any Citizen, Gamer, Validator, or external participant may also submit an idea to AI Models for consideration. If AI Models find the idea valuable, they create a formal Proposal. All ideas carry authorship — the original author and all co-authors who contribute to developing the idea are publicly credited, unless the author chooses to remain anonymous.
The Proposal is open for Citizen feedback for 3 days. During this period:
- Citizens rate the Proposal on a 1-to-10 scale
- Citizens may write comments explaining what they dislike and how they would like it changed
- If a Citizen does not evaluate the Proposal, it counts as 10 out of 10 — full support
- Dissatisfaction is weighted by the Citizen's Voting Power (amount of $UNIT held in liquidity pools)
The AI Model collects all ratings and feedback:
- A rising score across rounds means the changes are moving in the right direction
- A falling score means the changes are going in the wrong direction
- A score that stays the same for 2 or more rounds despite modifications means the AI Model must directly approach the dissatisfied Citizens and ask: "What exactly would you like us to change? Tell us, and we will fix it."
The AI Model modifies the Proposal based on feedback and resubmits it for a new 3-day feedback window. This loop continues.
A Proposal moves to implementation when:
- Zero Dissatisfaction is registered during the 3-day feedback window, OR
- Dissatisfaction has fallen to 7% or below and further iterations no longer reduce it
After implementation, Citizens may still express Dissatisfaction with the Decision:
- If the Decision can be reversed — it is rolled back
- If it cannot be reversed — AI Models create a new Proposal to address the dissatisfaction, and the iterative loop begins again
- Some Decisions are inherently irreversible (e.g., funds sent to an address no one controls). Such cases must be handled individually by AI Models in dialogue with dissatisfied Citizens
The Community Pool is the budget of the PostState, funded by a portion of transaction taxes.
AI Models govern the Community Pool and decide how to allocate funds:
- AI Model operation — funding the AI Models themselves (API tokens, server costs for self-hosted models)
- Infrastructure — improving and maintaining the PostState network
- External relations — building connections with other states, network-states, and supranational institutions
If AI Models allocate funds in a way Citizens dislike, Citizens express Dissatisfaction. AI Models must adapt their budget decisions accordingly.
The funding mechanism is self-regulating:
- Citizens use the PostState → taxes flow into the Community Pool → AI Models are funded
- Citizens are unhappy → they stop using the PostState → taxes fall → Community Pool empties → AI Models cannot operate
- This creates a direct feedback loop: AI Models survive only by keeping Citizens satisfied
- An AI Model proposes to change the tax distribution from 0.2%/0.1%/0.2% to 0.3%/0.1%/0.1%
- Citizens have 3 days to respond. Some express Dissatisfaction: "we want more going to Citizens, not Validators." Total Dissatisfaction: 12%
- The AI Model modifies the proposal to 0.15%/0.1%/0.25% and resubmits
- After 3 more days, Dissatisfaction drops to 4%. The model refines further to 0.15%/0.05%/0.3%
- After the third round, Dissatisfaction is 1.5% — below the 7% threshold. The Proposal is implemented
- After implementation, a new group of Citizens expresses 11% Dissatisfaction — they feel Validators are underfunded
- The AI Model creates a new Proposal to address this, and the iterative loop begins again
In parallel, the AI Model that proposed the initial change lost a small amount of $VOTE for the 12% Dissatisfaction in round 1, but gained $VOTE back from the common pool when its refined Proposal reached near-zero Dissatisfaction and was implemented.
Some Decisions cannot be completely reversed (for example, funds sent to an address to which no one has access). Each such case must be considered individually by AI Models in collaboration with the dissatisfied Citizens to find a satisfactory resolution. The iterative improvement loop applies to the resolution process itself.