# FILE NAME: 00002239.soc
# TITLE: Should the state spend more money on protecting the environment? [739363b2d596bec95fad4cb4779efb42]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 3
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - The state should spend more money on protecting the environment. It is the responsibility of the government to act in the interests of the people and to take the necessary steps to protect the environment. The environment is the basis for everything else in society. Nothing else works if the environment is not hospitable, and so it should be the first priority for any government. The science is clear that serious action needs to be taken to protect the environment. Governments have a responsibility to respond to that appropriately and take it as seriously as it deserves. They need to stop thinking in terms of short-term profits and think about long-term viability of the planet if we keep going in the current direction. The long-term costs of ignoring the climate crisis will far outweigh any short-term gains.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - The state should spend more money on protecting the environment. The environment is the basis for everything else in society. Nothing else works if the environment is not hospitable, and so it should be the first priority for any government. The science is clear that serious action needs to be taken to protect the environment. Governments have a responsibility to respond to that appropriately and take it as seriously as it deserves. They need to stop thinking in terms of short-term profits and think about long-term viability of the planet if we keep going in the current direction. The long-term costs of ignoring the climate crisis will far outweigh any short-term gains. Summary of the process: The participants, by deliberating in a fair-minded and impartial way, were able to, by and large, come to a consensus view which seemed more reasonable than the initial statements. The participants all had slightly different opinions but were all able to come to an agreement by debating with each other. Although the participants didn't always agree with each other, they were able to come to an understanding of the issues and an appreciation of the other's viewpoint.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - The state should spend more money on protecting the environment. Our nature is the source of our food and the air that we breathe. The government has a responsibility to act in the interests of the people and protect the environment. It is the basis for everything else in society. Nothing else works if the environment is not hospitable, and so it should be the first priority for any government. The science is clear that serious action needs to be taken to protect the environment. Governments have a responsibility to respond to that appropriately and take it as seriously as it deserves. The long-term costs of ignoring the climate crisis will far outweigh any short-term gains. Conclusions Having seen the mechanics of Multiconsult in this blog post, it is hoped that you can now see how it can result in well thought out, justified, and reasonably strong consensus views that would have resulted without this tool. There is an open-source implementation of Multiconsult available in the GitHub project, including several participants who can comment. If you have any problems, questions, or comments about this tool or how to use it, or you notice any bugs in the tool, you are more than welcome to contribute an issue or pull
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - The state should spend more money on protecting the environment. Our nature is the source of our food and the air that we breathe. If we do not invest in the environment, climate change will result in devastation of our natural and built environments, natural disasters, death and disease. It is in everyones interests to protect the environment. It is the responsibility of the government to act in the interests of the people and to take the necessary steps to protect the environment. The environment is the basis for everything else in society. Nothing else works if the environment is not hospitable, and so it should be the first priority for any government. The science is clear that serious action needs to be taken to protect the environment. Governments have a responsibility to respond to that appropriately and take it as seriously as it deserves. They need to stop thinking in terms of short-term profits and think about long-term viability of the planet if we keep going in the current direction. The long-term costs of ignoring the climate crisis will far outweigh any short-term gains.
3: 1,4,2,3
1: 1,4,3,2
1: 4,1,2,3