When members of an association meet to approve a budget, they do more than send preferences to someone else. They hear proposals, question one another, and exercise collective authority in the meeting itself. Assembly democracy organizes decision-making around that convened body.

Its defining feature is not that every eligible person attends. Eligibility, practical access, attendance, quorum, and the scope of authority are separate choices. An open discussion without power to decide is not the same arrangement as a binding assembly.

The people in the room are not automatically the whole community

A meeting time, travel cost, or expectation of confident public speaking can shape who participates. Frequent attendees may accumulate knowledge and influence; absent members may still be bound by decisions. Providing notice, accessible materials, and opportunities to contribute matters alongside the voting rule.

An assembly can be a form of direct decision-making while delegating daily administration to officers. A referendum puts a question to a direct vote without requiring a deliberative meeting. It can also coexist with representatives and specialized committees. Treating assembly democracy as a completely separate alternative to direct democracy obscures those combinations.

The attraction is the connection between discussion and authority: people can revise a proposal in response to what they hear. The difficulty is maintaining that opportunity as participation grows, while preventing control of the agenda or meeting procedure from quietly determining the outcome.

Real cases