Nepal Picks a New Prime Minister on a Discord Server Days After Social Media Ban

How is one faction holding an internal vote to impose rule on the rest of the people, who have no representation, anything at all like a democracy?

Discord is a spectacularly bad fit for that, it was probably only used because the timetable was short and "it was there" and "everyone already had it".

I don't see that argument at all. What was so democratic about it? Violent overthrowal of the government may sometimes be justified, but it is not an act of democracy.

If the format is to be sustainable, they will need to find or found a different platform.

1) You could make digital elections secure with issued digital IDs, and simply recording everyone's vote and it would be easily auditable.

But no one wants elections where (the contents of) your vote is recorded somewhere.

So 2) You use your digital ID to be able to vote once, but if you're no longer connected to your vote, it would be much more susceptible to tampering if you can't establish a double blind chain of custody of the votes, which is what expensive in person voting is doing very well.

The first option would be great if you could somehow guarantee a corruption free future of your country where no one will come after you for your vote (hint: you can't).

Outside the comfy first world, the bar for government sanity can get extremely low.

Therefore activists need suggesting a representative of the groups. IMHO a private voting is fine in this case.