Councils are the advisory and peer-review groups of Drayker: interested collaborators take part according to demonstrated competence, rigorous study, relevant experience and validated contribution.
Why this exists
Drayker is a way of working where people keep creating, discovering and learning while intelligence carries the rest, and what results reaches the work that produced it. Councils are where a proposal stops being one person’s idea and meets people who have read enough to argue with it.
The argument in full is on the manifesto. The economy page states plainly what contributing here earns and what it does not.
What a council does
In DFMP, validation runs alongside development rather than after it. Ideas are discussed with the communities and the councils, and turned into a comprehensive, detailed, widely revised paper, which then passes through the DAOs and/or the councils depending on its purpose.
A council is therefore not an approval gate bolted onto the end of the process. It is where a proposal meets people who have read enough to argue with it.
Councils are not permanent bodies of notables and do not form a bureaucratic caste. Their role is to produce reasoned, inspectable and contestable review under DFMP. During the transition, those reviews may inform bounded DAF decisions; durable authority remains with the member constitution and PAP as validated functions migrate into it.
State of this documentation
Almost nothing is written down here. How a council is formed, how someone joins one, which councils exist, and how a council records its position are all undefined, and this repository previously pointed at a page that no longer exists.
For a system whose legitimacy depends on decentralized peer review, that gap matters more than most. Writing the first version of “how a council works” does not require authority. It requires someone to propose it and the communities to argue it through.
How it fits the whole
Councils are where a proposal stops being one person’s idea and meets people who have read enough to argue with it — the peer-review layer of a system whose legitimacy depends on decentralized validation.
They are woven into the method: in DFMP, validation runs alongside development, and ideas can pass through communities and councils before a decision. During the transition, councils may feed bounded decisions into DAF; durable authority belongs to the member constitution and the environments into which validated functions migrate. Participation in councils can follow relevant study, interest, experience and demonstrated contribution, without turning prominence or one reputation score into unreviewable authority. Academy and Dk Personal may help a person learn and represent context, while UID preserves attribution. Review remains contestable and does not become a vote merely because it is attributable.
Contributing
Open an issue. Issues small enough for one person to finish carry the open-function label and appear on the board at drayker.org.
Related: dfmp (the proposal and validation process) · daf (the federation and its decisions)
Drayker is a volunteer, non-profit organization. Content licensed CC BY 4.0.