The practical questions of a person deciding whether to enter, or who has already entered
What this document is. Short answers to what is asked most often, with a pointer to where the full answer is. It establishes nothing and creates no rules: the rules are in the Charter and the Declaration, and on any divergence it is they that apply.
Legal objections - about self-determination, legal personality, and recognition - are examined separately, in detail and with the arguments against us: Objections and Answers.
The contribution covers the cost of identity verification and passport issuance. It goes into the common treasury and is allocated in published shares: platform 25 per cent, growth and communications 30, community projects 20, education 15, reserve 10.
The contribution does not buy belonging: belonging arises by signing the Declaration.
→ Treasury
No. The contribution is one-time: after the passport is received there are no annual or monthly payments.
Then someone else will make the contribution for you. At the payment step there is a second button - "I need the contribution": it asks nothing and puts you in an open queue where only a number and a date are visible. Anyone may pay for the queue, but no one may choose whom to pay for - payment is always made for whoever is at the head of the queue. The passport you receive will be exactly like everyone else's: the registry does not record who paid for it. You will have to wait, but money will not close entry for good. More detail is in the document The Earthling Path.
Yes. After receiving the passport there is no obligatory activity: you can remain a participant without spending time, and join in later or not at all.
Passive participation is full participation. Entering itself increases the size of the people, and with it the weight of its common voice - and that is already a contribution. Activity usually comes later, when a person sees that others' participation brings results.
If you do nothing for a long time, your status becomes inactive: the right to vote is retained in full and is restored on your first action, and your vote simply stops counting towards the quorum, so as not to raise the quorum requirement for everyone else.
Nothing. Citizenship, taxes, and jurisdiction are not affected. The earthling passport gives no visa rights, does not replace the documents of your country, and has no force in state institutions.
Real first and last names, document numbers, and biometric images are not stored. The registry holds only a pseudonym, an email address, confirmation of being 18+, a country, and the verification status.
Separately, in an isolated system, irreversible cryptographic hashes are stored - solely so that one person cannot hold two valid passports.
→ Biometric Verification Policy
No. Your public name is a pseudonym you choose. The document data are checked only at the moment of verification and are deleted afterwards.
→ Biometric Verification Policy
The link between the real person and the pseudonym is not retained: only what one holds can be disclosed. What can be stolen are encrypted irreversible hashes, from which neither an image nor document data can be obtained. The stores are separated, encryption is AES-256, and notice of an incident is given within 72 hours.
Only under a court decision in force or an equivalent lawful requirement, whose legitimacy is checked in every case. The participant is notified, unless the decision prohibits notification.
→ Biometric Verification Policy
Exit is voluntary only and without giving reasons: a statement, 72 hours for confirmation (the pause can be waived), then you burn the passport yourself with your own key. The server does not store your keys and can neither do it for you nor prevent it.
The link between the data and your identity is broken, and the processing of personal data ceases. Units of account remain your property. You can return at any time.
No. No procedure of expulsion exists under any circumstances or for any majority.
And your vote cannot be taken away for your views. Not for how you vote, not for disagreement with decisions, and not as a general punishment for breaking rules. The restrictions at five levels concern participation in Cells (the small working groups), the right to submit proposals, and access to services, but not the vote and not belonging.
The single exception is a proven attack on the voting mechanism itself: collusion, buying or selling a vote, coercing others, an attempt to obtain a second passport. Then the vote is suspended for up to 6 months by a decision at 75 per cent, secret, with a right of defence and appeal. Opinions are never a ground.
The sole decision-making body is the DAO Assembly, that is, all the participants. The founder has no special rights.
A transitional period is under way, and this is acknowledged openly: some functions are still performed procedurally, the treasury keys are held by the founder, and transferring them is a criterion for moving to the next phase. But even now the founders cannot change the Declaration, deprive anyone of status, spend common funds for personal ends, or block decentralization.
→ Roadmap
Capture requires accumulation, and there is nothing to accumulate: the vote is tied one to one to a confirmed human being, is not bought, and is not derived from money, reputation, or office. The unamendable core is placed beyond any vote.
Instead of a guardian who would become a master, there is the right to leave together with the registry: passports and the records of them lie on a public network, not on our servers, so the people leaves a captured platform without leaving anything in it, and the gain from capture falls to zero. The community builds a new platform against the same registry by published rules; the code of the platform and of identity verification is closed, because it works with personal data.
No. Its opinions are advisory only: it cannot block decisions, has no veto, takes no part in finances, and cannot even delay putting a question to a vote. A member of it can be recalled only on a named ground, and disagreement with their position is not such a ground.
The Council has not yet been formed.
You cannot leave a cult. Leaving here is one action with your own key, and no one can prevent it, the founder included. No reasons need be given.
Power is concentrated at no single point, coordinators are recallable at any time, and criticism is a right, not an offence. The core of values is minimal: dignity, freedom, solidarity. Your faith, your views, and your way of life are not asked about here.
The vote is not bought and does not depend on money - this is an unamendable rule. Blockchain is used where a record that cannot be forged is needed: passports, votes, the treasury.
The unit of account is traded nowhere today and serves only internal turnover. Exchange availability in the future is possible but is not promised and is not an aim, and no one promises growth in value under any course of events.
The infrastructure is the same, and there is no sense in pretending otherwise. The difference is in what it is connected to.
Previous attempts broke on three things. One token, one vote: whoever has more funds decides. No identity verification: one person votes with many wallets. No unamendable foundation: the rules of voting themselves become the subject of a vote.
Here the vote is tied to a confirmed living human being and does not depend on a balance; the unit of account gives no votes, whatever the amount held; organizations cannot be participants; and belonging, the equal vote, the right to leave, and the values are placed beyond voting altogether.
Has this construction been tested at scale - no. We say only that the causes of failure in earlier attempts are named and that answers to them are built into the design.
No. Supporting tools help with the initial screening of applications and with analytics, but people decide. Any automated output is advisory, its reasons are disclosed, and review by a human being is guaranteed at your request.
There is nothing to wait for and no one to wait on: no body that recognizes peoples exists for anyone. There is no register of peoples, and no people - not the Kurds, not the Palestinians, not the Sami - has ever gone through a procedure confirming its existence.
There is something else. Legal cognizability - when a people is treated as a people where a specific question arises: at venues, in consultations, in proceedings. It accumulates through practice, time, the number of participants, and legal work, and all four depend on us rather than on someone else's authority. Whether this is fast or slow, no one promises; the arguments against us are examined without softening.
Working: identity verification, passports, the platform, the system of Cells. The treasury is held in a Safe wallet, and its transactions are public and verifiable by any person at the address.
Not working yet: no substantive votes have been held, the treasury smart contracts - the programs that execute decisions without an intermediary - are not deployed, and the unit of account has not been issued. There is still no multisignature on the treasury wallet: the signature threshold is one, the key is with the founder, and this is visible at the address. The move to a multisignature of six elected signatories is a criterion for moving between phases of the Roadmap. The Core Nodes and the Emergency Multisig - those entrusted with technical support and emergency response - have not been elected, and the Independent Council has not been formed.
→ Roadmap
The list is open: as new questions appear, the document is extended.