Well looking at the self organised associations which grew into federations and allowing for dissent which would be supported by the CNT who were the main instigators of this revolution it seems that the line between their federal system and direct democracy are very blurred. In each area the CNT had a minimum of 20 members. " as throughout the region, the committees of the agricultural collectives were merged with the local council and become the basic social unit of the new society." This info comes from an eyewitness, Balkanski.
In seven months the Aragon collectives, formed into regional federations, surpassed, in the shape of truly socialist achievements, that which the kolkhozes (collective farms) in the USSR never achieved in 60 years. Daily life was steeped in the spirit of equality and solidarity. One of the articles in the Congress of Caspe Resolution made it clear: “In forming the local federations as well as the Regional Federation, it is necessary to eliminate the traditional boundaries the villages set up between themselves. Furthermore all the tools of work will be available for common usage and raw materials made available to any collective that has need of them without distinction.” In this way it was impossible for privileged collectives to exist alongside others less favoured by pre-existing circumstances, that is to say rich and poor as still exist today in the USSR.
Journey no 1, June 1987
I have found that direct democracy among certain anarchists is looked at as only a political manifestation but I think that is not allowing for the experience outlined above.
From an eyewitness in Calanda: " The administrative council met every evening and if there was a problem we made a note of it for the general meeting. In fact, in Calanda, as in other collectives, power was exercised in the form of direct democracy. Decisions were taken at the general assembly of collectives. There was a weekly assembly on Saturdays and another very important one once a month".