I have spoken of the checks and balances of the Geodemocracy in other pages. The geometry is part of that, but there are other checks and balances involved.

I mentioned that there are no positions of power in the Geodemocracy, which is a major check on people getting power and using that power poorly. A major check on such power gathering is the random assignment of members to their I-teams. If a group of people of almost any size, unified by a partidular worldview, decide to hijack the Geodemocracy, they have no chance of taking over whole I-teams, much less whole O-teams. In fact, they would likely find themselves scattered through the whole membership. Even if they propose as subjects something they, as a group, wish to promote, they are balanced out by all the members in their I-teams who would not necessarily choose their subject. If they tried to disrupt the Geodemocracy, they would likely find themselves being shuttled at random all around the system, which would not result in their goals.

Also, the practice of transparency is a check on power gathering. Everything that goes on in the Geodemocracy is recorded and available to any other I-Team, and through the General Archive, to anyone in the world. There will be no secrets in the Geodemocracy system other than the name of the head of the General Archive during their term and the three randomly picked I-teams which act as oversight on that person. And that person is also picked at random. If a group started some campaign to hijack or disrupt the Geodemocracy, such antics would be noticed by the membership through the transcripts available in the General archives and that pattern of abuse would likely also become a subject in a multitude of I-Teams.

Another check on power is the way that what a member supports is up to them. They cannot be forced to support something they don't like or they consider less important than what they do choose. Since there is no more majority weight as minority weight, it is impossible for a power seeker to gather the resources from members that don't want to support a particular project. It is unwilling support that tyrants use to do their evil.

Another check on abuse is the design of the Subjects system. In traditional systems, like a Bill in Congress, a proposal will be created by one or just a few people with what they know. In the Geodemocracy, everyone self-educates on every subject they are to vote for, and the Subjects which go to higher resolutions will be the work of a lot of people, not just a few or one person. Most of the characteristics and ramifications of a Subject will be revealed during the Self-education week or the Decision week during the Ongoing Meeting. It is unlikely a Subject would be approved that had glaring problems in it, so such problems, which are often revealed after a Bill passes in Congress, would prevent the Subject being accepted by the I-teams involved in the first place.

The Geodemocracy itself is not the action component of the system. It simply makes decisions and allocates funds to make those decisions happen. The Geodemocracy creates Projects to actually accomplish the decided on work. The Projects are heirarchies, and therefore corruptable. So the members and I-teams who support a Project are responsible for overseeing the Projects work, progress, and results. Everyone in a Project has to be a member of the Geodemocracy, even if they are not one of the members who proposed or support the Project. Every member in a Project has to keep a record of what is done and why which is instantly available to the whole Geodemocracy. When there are thousand of Projects, perhaps millions, it will be those who support a Project that will be primary oversight on those Projects.

Another check on the power of any heirarchical Project is the timeline of the Project. Projects will exist for set periods of time. While some projects can be authorized to last longer, the extension of time will come as a seperate proposal in a large Geodemocracy resolution, and even if the same people form the new Project, it will also be constrained by a set day for solution or dissolution. There can be no open ended Projects, period.

Frankly, trying to corrupt a Geodemocracy is like trying to drive jello into a brick. There's no way to get a grip on it.