THE QUESTION
Why do atrocities go unpunished?
Propose what to do, then judge whether each action would move each root.
30 at the table (29 simulated) · 3 actions proposed against 6 root causes. Add one, then judge whether each action moves each cause.
Viewing as guest. Enter a handle to join and take part.
Score the roots first
why
The method's own practice, before any action is proposed: each root cause is scored 1–5 on how feasible it is to address, how much impact addressing it would have, and how likely it is to resolve by itself with no intervention. Priority goes to roots with high impact, high feasibility and low likelihood of fixing themselves — priority = impact + feasibility − likelihood. Scores are averaged across the group and shown with how many scored.
1 = low, 5 = high. Your own scores; the group's averages beside them.
| root cause | feasible | impact | fixes itself | priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The same states arming a party also vote on protecting its victims | – | |||
| Speaking publicly ends the access that lets us feed people | – | |||
| Early warning systems produce reports nobody is obliged to answer | – | |||
| Naming it triggers obligations, so it is not named | – | |||
| Every state judges the case by what it costs them | – | |||
| So the organisation that knows most says least | – |
Would each action move each root cause?
Down the side: the actions people proposed. Across the top: the root causes the map found. Every square is one vote on one question — would this action significantly reduce that cause? One side has to reach 75% of the votes cast to settle it; short of that the square stays split.
why
Answered at 75% of votes cast, like every other question here. Split means people voted and neither side reached that bar — it is a result, not a queue, and it stays split until enough people change their minds. A square nobody settles stays undecided; it never turns into a no. Judging each pair on its own is what stops a popular action being credited with fixing things it does not touch.
| ACTION | ROOT CAUSES · does the action on the left reduce it? | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The same states arming a party also vote on protecting its victims | Speaking publicly ends the access that lets us feed people | Early warning systems produce reports nobody is obliged to answer | Naming it triggers obligations, so it is not named | Every state judges the case by what it costs them | So the organisation that knows most says least | |
| A standing obligation to answer an early warning in writing, within days discuss | ✓ yes, it reduces this 24 yes / 5 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 23 yes / 6 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ⚑ the group split 8 yes / 21 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✗ no, it does not 1 yes / 28 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 24 yes / 5 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 24 yes / 5 no · 22 of 29 settles it |
| Fund prevention as a line, not as a response discuss | ✓ yes, it reduces this 22 yes / 7 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✗ no, it does not 3 yes / 26 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 26 yes / 3 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 25 yes / 4 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✗ no, it does not 3 yes / 26 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 24 yes / 5 no · 22 of 29 settles it |
| Protect the mandate of an organisation that speaks discuss | ✗ no, it does not 7 yes / 22 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 24 yes / 5 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 23 yes / 6 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 23 yes / 6 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✗ no, it does not 6 yes / 23 no · 22 of 29 settles it | ✓ yes, it reduces this 25 yes / 4 no · 22 of 29 settles it |
Highest leverage so far
A standing obligation to answer an early warning in writing, within days reduces 4 of 6 root causes
Fund prevention as a line, not as a response reduces 4 of 6 root causes
Protect the mandate of an organisation that speaks reduces 4 of 6 root causes