Compared to existing on-line democracy tools, KuneAgi differentiates itself by:

  • a collective and deliberative dimension in the drafting of texts. Instead of having isolated individuals writing proposals in parallel, these individuals cooperate in a dedicated Working Group. This Working Group mobilises fully democratic procedures to deliver a text taking into account the technical competencies, the political values and the legitimate interests of all of its participants
  • an orientation towards concrete public policy proposals, including the necessity to define priorities.

The main function of social networks (of which the best known is FaceBook) is to gather people around subjects of common interest, and to disseminate within this group the information relevant for its members. The intention is to gather people, to have a discussion or a chat, to create a semi-permanent affective social link - of which the nature and depth remain an issue for further debate.

A forum is the locus of a non-conclusive discussion, on themes that may be highly specialised, where everyone brings in his/her question or issue, by initiating a "discussion thread", to which the other participants answer. The frequent pitfall of these tools is that the ensuing discussion has no end, turns in endless inconclusive rounds or in sterile disputes. Even if interesting arguments were exchanged, no trace of them is left, and no capitalisation is possible.

The best-known Wiki-type software is MediaWiki, upon which the on-line Wikipedia encyclopedia operates. These software suites have very simple and open operating rules: anybody may register, intervene, modify the texts on-line. The documents produced with this tool are not exempt from conflicts (as illustrated by the "talk" tab of the article on the caricatures of Muhammad in the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten).

Professional collaborative work software aims at reaching a common objective that is defined beforehand, and for which the quality evaluation criteria are known.