As already indicated the Xin system has to be a distributed system. It should also be a heterogeneous systems and the software that runs it should optimally also be heterogeneous. Diversity is the first line of security. Would such a society driving system really be devised it would definitely be subverted. In that case it would be preferable if only a small part of it would be subverted. Yet a protocol has to be agreed upon and that will likely bring its own vulnerabilities. I'm no security buff, so I'm probably the wrong person to argue on this ...
The workings of the Kama system have been explained in section 5.1.3.2. The categories could be taken from an expert database in the net for starters. The expertise tree would likely be subject to much tweaking.
The forumesque entries in a Xin could be made even more useful by ``discussion digistion''. I don't know if that has been tried anywhere yet: If you are or were at some point a persevering blog reader you will have noticed that many comments are redundant. By a combination of techniques from, blogs, forums, and wikis it should be possible to digist (extract the gist from) longish discussions. Instead of adding yet another comment people could modify existing comments and rate modifications, link related arguments, weed out redundant stuff, and so on. I can hardly believe that such a thing could work, but then I could hardly believe that Wikipedia could work. And discussion digistion would be immensely useful. Since nothing would be anonymous in Xin entries this might even be more plausible than Wikipedia.
Thorsten Roggendorf 2008-11-06