Teisond gives every verified citizen a permanent channel to render civic judgment – expressed as trust or distrust – on any official exercising governmental authority, from the prime minister to a local building inspector. Civic judgments are aggregated into a public legitimacy index for each official. No one knows how you judged. Everyone sees the result.
This page explains the mechanics. For the full technical and legal framework, see the White Paper.
You register on your national Platform ({country}.teisond.com) and verify your identity by scanning your government-issued ID document (passport or national ID card) and completing a short biometric liveness check – confirming you are a real person holding your own document. The process takes under a minute and works in all 27 EU member states. Where national eID systems are available and connected to the Platform, they serve as an additional verification option.
There is no alternative verification. No email sign-up, no social media login, no phone number. One person, one account – guaranteed by the state-issued identity behind it.
Your verification provider sends confirmed identity attributes to the Platform. These attributes are immediately processed through a one-way cryptographic hash (SHA-256 with a seasonal salt). The Platform stores only the resulting fingerprint – a string of characters that cannot be reversed to reveal who you are.
Your name, ID number, date of birth, and every other personal identifier are discarded at the moment of hashing. They never enter the database. Even Platform developers cannot determine who you are.
The cryptographic salt rotates annually. After the retention period, old salts are permanently deleted – making retroactive identification technically impossible, not just prohibited by policy.
Once verified, you can find any official in the system – by name, position, institution, or jurisdiction – and render your civic judgment: trust or distrust. That's it. Two options. No questionnaires, no ratings, no written justifications.
Because the Platform measures legitimacy – whether citizens accept an official's authority – not performance, competence, or policy approval. Trust or distrust is the most fundamental civic judgment a citizen can render. It takes seconds, requires no expertise, and cannot be gamed through sophisticated questionnaire design.
Only your current state per official: trust, distrust, or neutral. The system does not store a history of your changes. There is no record of when you changed your mind or how many times.
To prevent manipulation, judgment changes are rate-limited to one change per official per month. This means you can express and update your judgment freely, but cannot flood the system with rapid reversals.
Civic judgments from thousands of verified citizens are aggregated into a legitimacy index for each official – a single number from 0 to 100, published with a confidence interval and sample size.
The formula is simple and public:
If 650 citizens express trust and 350 express distrust, the legitimacy ratio is 65.0%. Citizens who remain neutral (never judged or withdrew their judgment) are not counted in either direction – the index reflects only the balance among those who chose to express a position.
Every published index is accompanied by a 95% confidence interval, so readers always know how statistically reliable the number is. Larger samples produce narrower intervals.
A confidence interval tells you how precise the number is. If an official's legitimacy ratio is 65% with a confidence interval of ±3%, this means the true ratio is almost certainly between 62% and 68%. The more citizens who express their judgment, the narrower the interval becomes – and the more you can trust the number.
Think of it this way: 65% based on 200 judgments is a rough signal – the interval might be ±7%, meaning the real figure could be anywhere from 58% to 72%. But 65% based on 20,000 judgments is a precise measurement – the interval shrinks to ±0.7%. Same ratio, fundamentally different reliability. The confidence interval is what makes that difference visible.
An index is published only when the number of judgments exceeds a minimum threshold, set per country and authority level. Below this threshold, the Platform displays "Not enough judgments" – not a number, not a qualitative indicator, nothing that could be misread.
Indices are computed continuously and attributed to monthly publication periods. Historical charts preserve the period-final values, so you can track an official's trajectory over time.
The legitimacy index reflects current public acceptance of an official's authority. It is a measure of perceived legitimacy – whether citizens trust or distrust the person holding the office.
It is not a performance review. It is not a policy approval rating. It is not an election forecast. It does not claim to measure whether an official deserves trust – only whether they currently have it.
The Platform covers officials exercising governmental authority at four levels:
For every official under public scrutiny at the national level, there are dozens to hundreds of officials at lower levels who exercise real authority over citizens' daily lives. Teisond covers them all.
Official profiles contain only: name, position, institution, jurisdiction, and authority level. No biographies, no news, no commentary.
The Platform provides three tiers of data access:
No registration. See a qualitative indicator – "Majority trust," "Divided," or "Majority distrust" – without numerical values.
Free. See the legitimacy ratio as a percentage, trend indicator (rising, falling, stable), and sample size. Sufficient for civic oversight and media citation.
Paid – officials and institutions. Absolute counts, time-series analytics, peer comparisons, anomaly reports, geographic breakdowns. A subscription purchases depth – it has zero effect on the index.
The Platform employs multiple detection layers: velocity monitoring (sudden spikes in activity), temporal clustering analysis (statistically improbable patterns), geographic concentration detection, and account-age weighting.
When anomalies are detected, they are flagged publicly – not silently removed. A transparency note explains what happened, so readers can assess data quality independently. The Platform never secretly deletes judgments or adjusts numbers behind the scenes.
Detailed specifications of detection algorithms are not published – to prevent gaming – but the existence, purpose, and general approach of each safeguard is documented in the public methodology. For the full technical description, see the White Paper.
Teisond's privacy commitments are not policies that could be changed by a management decision. They are structural properties of the system – enforced by architecture, not by restraint.
For the full set of structural guarantees, see the Sovereignty and Trust Framework →
The complete index calculation methodology is published in the White Paper – including the formula, confidence interval method, publication thresholds, rounding rules, and anomaly flagging criteria. Anyone with the aggregated inputs can independently verify the output.
Every change to the algorithm, publication thresholds, or operational parameters is documented in the Platform Journal (section: Technical Changelog) before it takes effect. There are no silent updates. The Platform Journal also contains methodology notes and transparency reports – but technical changes are always recorded separately in a dedicated, auditable changelog.
AGPT Ltd commits to periodic independent audits covering security, methodology, privacy, and legal compliance. Audit results are published.
The Platform produces a signal. The signal belongs to the public.
A permanent mechanism for continuous civic judgment across all levels of governmental authority. It is infrastructure that supplements elections, media, and other accountability mechanisms – not a replacement for any of them.
Think of it as a mirror. Not one that flatters or distorts – one that simply reflects. Officials see how citizens perceive their authority. Citizens see that their judgment, aggregated with thousands of others, forms a signal that power cannot ignore. The mirror does not tell anyone what to do. It shows what is.
A replacement for elections. Not a legal mechanism creating binding obligations. Not a political party or advocacy organisation. Not a social network or discussion forum. Not a surveillance system. Not a tool for punishment or reward.
What citizens, officials, media, and institutions do with that signal is their decision – not ours. We build the mirror. We do not tell anyone what they should see in it.
Participation is the beginning, not the end. Teisond is designed with a specific destination in mind.
You render civic judgments. Your participation – and everyone else's – creates a continuous public signal about how authority is exercised.
Active participants gain governance rights. Not as customers – as contributors to infrastructure that belongs to those who use it.
The Platform is designed to transfer to citizen ownership. The governance pathway, the token model, and the ownership mechanism are documented in the White Paper (Section 9).