Reference 35 on the Wikipedia page for Soviet Democracy

Other historians like Robert W. Thurston argue, while the top of the soviet system became largely bureaucratic, the local levels of society remained largely participatory.[34] He writes "while sane, calm, and sober, no worker would have dared to say that socialism was a poor system or that Stalin was an idiot" but then goes on to argue that these bounds still allowed for citizens to have meaningful participation on their immediate situation and this local participation meant "ultimately relatively little was controlled by the government or party decree".[34]

This is supported by some historical accounts. For example, in Pat Sloan's historical account of participating in a Soviet election, he wrote:[35]

I have, while working in the Soviet Union, participated in an election. I, too, had a right to vote, as I was a working member of the community, and nationality and citizenship are no bar to electoral rights. The procedure was extremely simple. A general meeting of all the workers in our organisation was called. by the trade union committee, candidates were discussed, and a vote was taken by show of hands. Anybody present had the right to propose a candidate, and the one who was elected was not personally a member of the Party. In considering the claims of the candidates their past activities were discussed, they themselves had to answer questions as to their qualifications, anybody could express an opinion, for or against them, and the basis of all the discussion was: What justification had the candidates to represent their comrades on the local Soviet?

It isn't the exact same Wikipedia page, to be charitable to you, but again I don't see why you immediately jump to insults rather than asking for clarification. We both know I'm a communist, we both know I've read these pages, we both know I've read beyond them. Just drop the insults, step away for a moment, and breathe. You're fine.