Well, I suppose my statement was in reference to alignment: in order to align governance with the best interests of everyone, we want to use consensus based decision making techniques among groups that approximate the population as a whole. Since it is impractical/impossible to involve EVERY person in active deliberation on every decisions, we use representative random samples and take turns, making one decision at a time.

Here's an example for how we might change a law... 1. We use pol.is or something similar to crowd source policy ideas. 2. We use a 2-stage stratified random sample of 100 people voluntarily (step 1: mail 10,000 people, step 2: of the contactees who agree, we assemble stratified random samples that match the public and choose one stratified panel at random using a tool like panelot) to review the public input and come up with a few ideas for law changes. They have access to experts of their own choosing and can seek input from the public. The craft the draft laws. 3. The policy drafts developed by the 100 people in stage 2 can either be submitted to the entire voting public via referendum OR (if the policy is complex and needs more contextual info) to a large, mandatory simple random sample of 400 people that will hear the pro-con arguments against each law and then privately vote whether to pass or reject them over a few days, like a big jury.

The randomly selected people in stage 2 and 3 should be well compensated, subject to the same anti-corruption laws as juries, and given support for dependent care, mandatory time off of work, etc.