Tony. That's a set of good questions. I have a series of answers for you.

First, I suggest that we just try out the TDG at the local level and see where it goes. It only needs about 10 hours a month from its early builders. That loss of free time is such a low risk venture!

Second, the early TDG won't be attractive to those with high tribal instincts. That early TDG won't have much to offer such people. I have charged the early TDG builders with the task of educating its members to vote in a much different way than why we vote today. That different way will bypass most tribalistic tendencies. But the change starts at the beginning, not when membership increases.

Third, the granulated nature of the TDG means it will be hard for tribalism to move to the top. I'll just explain this better with a little story.

About mid-way through my political career, I was a worker for a fellow wanting to win the internal party election. He and his campaign manager got an offer from a community leader of non-Causcaian group. This leader could sell 100 or more party memberships and bring them to the election meeting. But he wanted a favor in the future. The candidate and campaign manager refused.

The fact that this group was offering such a deal is suggestive that it was (and still is) happening a lot in Canadian politics--in internal party elections. Or you can just take my word: it still is.

This internal party election encompassed a constituency of about 30,000 people. Maybe 500 were party members. I think you have the math to understand how another 100 new members would tilt this internal election.

In the TDG, that 30,000-resident constiuency would be divided up into neighborhoods of 200 residents This comes to 150 electoral units in the same area. It would be very hard for that community leader to tilt all these elections. His community was disbursed throughout much of that constiuency.

Could he be successful in a few of them? Possibly. But not many.

Even if he manages six or so of his people in place, they will not have much influence at this local level. They have to rise higher to have influence. But six out 150? They cannot push themselves up the hierarchy on their own tribal instincts.

And if these six are bringing tribalistic tendencies into the TDG, the other neighborhood representatives will see this--and not vote them up any higher. The ambitious tribe has been thwarted.

The granulated nature of the TDG is a filtering mechanism to ensure humanistic attributes on the negative side do not rise very high in government.

If these neighborhood representatives do not rise high, then more humanistic attibrutes of the upper tiers will shine better.

It is very much about educating citizens how to vote. Here are a couple of links about that:

https://medium.com/tiered-democratic-governance/voting-for-good-character-1d8f9511a41d

https://medium.com/tiered-democratic-governance/voting-for-capacity-for-governance-ab86e73bd1fd

Between the education and the granulated structure, we will have citizens voting much more wisely than they do now.

And everyone still has a vote! Once a year!