Ok, its not entirely online, you have to print and post paper as well but its in the comfort and privacy of your own home. No one else needs to know...
Now if this survives legal challenge and looks to be successful and gets any publicity many other people and groups are going to jump on it and start doing the same.
I don't think this is what the critters in Sacramento had in mind so we can bet that they will immediately begin to tighten the screws and make this harder - registration and licensing for circulators, etc.
Instead of looking at this as bad, which it is for democracy in general, we can look at this as good from California RKBA point of view.
Why?
Because one of the first groups to jump on it if we win will be an anti-gun group to undo it and reverse it or amend it so its gutless, etc. So if Sacramento sees this approach as a bug and not a feature and changes the rules then the CRKBA becomes harder to overturn..
In many ways we can argue that this is a more pure and less corruptible method than the current "paper" approach. One of the big complaints of the current approach is that about five national companies do all of the signature gathering using paid volunteers. These volunteers are alledgedly renowned for misleading the voters about what it is that they are signing, hide the proposal, etc., and in some case flat out fraudulently forge signatures, etc. In our approach the circulator is the voter. They can peruse the online information, print out their own copies of the proposal and then under no pressure or time constraints can sign and submit their signatures. This is truly a grassroots approach which the initiative process was supposed to be all about. Much of the current legislation and administrative rules is intended to make it diffcult for all but the rich and connected. This approach cuts through all that and once again enables a direct citizen input.
See here why I think this approach may work.