People are still on this ridiculous view that Athenian 'direct democracy' dose not scale because they wrongly think EVERYONE voted on everything, that was not how it was done, they RANDOMLY SELECT a legislative body of the normal size we would have today, all citizens were eligible and just needed to self nominating by putting their name in the hat. That WILL SCALE TO ANY SIZE and it is called Sortition.
Not sure what that means, the ideas are very attractive to me for the reasons presented. In Australia we have compulsory voting and the problems mentioned of representational democracy, and it isn't going well with the latest generations of voters. A couple of new approaches like Vote Compass and lobbies of the social media type, that should be better. I suspect we are following USA practices of taking out their powerlessness and bitterness as online Trolls, but not voting - because we feel misrepresented. Not suspecting evil would be good.
how do you avoid the problems of pressure or trolling on pivotal delegates as happens in representative democracy? can you select/view delegates by their perspective? if so this is useful for people who want to delegate but poses a risk re trolling/pressure? i like the idea of having suggestions rather than just a vote? it is better to vote for a perspective than a person? if you do vote for a perspective you can get a lot of votes on an agreed aspect and different forks of votes on aspects of the issue which are contended and therefore needs more work/negotiation/change? eg the polls you have where you vote for an existing choice or add one. you could have trees of perspectives where something is agreed in broad principle with a few different perspectives on subissues? eg in Australia at the moment there will be a vote whether to recognise Aboriginal people in the constitution. I think most will vote yes. Good. But I think that the way the change has been written it could remove Aboriginal land rights in the process. It would be good to be able to vote conditional yes that land rights are not broken.
would people really trust google to run something like this? if goggle is dictating what information people can access they will completely own the game. given that google is really about gaining the maximum amount of power and money this is very scary to me.
+PBrofaith who do will you trust, at airesis.eu we develop an open source e-democracy software but we can get it to be accepted because the political establishment is in direct competition and there is a strong conflict of interest. by the way we have strong doubt on "liquid" democracy we prefer direct democracy
![Ice On My Teeth - ATEEZ エイティーズ 에이티즈 [Music Bank] | KBS WORLD TV 241115](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/c-n92OgbbwA/mqdefault.jpg)
I love this concept, but the idea of having Google own the ballot box makes me nervous.
Hence the idea of implementing this in the blockchain makes more sense.
it would have to be open source build using ETH or BTC.
So campaign by meme will be a thing? What a time to be alive!
Is there any way this might survive the discontinuation of Google+
Great idea, but do any of you guys know of a tool/software to actually apply this to a company?
L2o Ren the Cardano blockchain, once it’s complete in 2020
People are still on this ridiculous view that Athenian 'direct democracy' dose not scale because they wrongly think EVERYONE voted on everything, that was not how it was done, they RANDOMLY SELECT a legislative body of the normal size we would have today, all citizens were eligible and just needed to self nominating by putting their name in the hat.
That WILL SCALE TO ANY SIZE and it is called Sortition.
Not sure what that means, the ideas are very attractive to me for the reasons presented. In Australia we have compulsory voting and the problems mentioned of representational democracy, and it isn't going well with the latest generations of voters. A couple of new approaches like Vote Compass and lobbies of the social media type, that should be better. I suspect we are following USA practices of taking out their powerlessness and bitterness as online Trolls, but not voting - because we feel misrepresented. Not suspecting evil would be good.
how do you avoid the problems of pressure or trolling on pivotal delegates as happens in representative democracy?
can you select/view delegates by their perspective?
if so this is useful for people who want to delegate but poses a risk re trolling/pressure?
i like the idea of having suggestions rather than just a vote?
it is better to vote for a perspective than a person?
if you do vote for a perspective you can get a lot of votes on an agreed aspect and different forks of votes on aspects of the issue which are contended and therefore needs more work/negotiation/change?
eg the polls you have where you vote for an existing choice or add one.
you could have trees of perspectives where something is agreed in broad principle with a few different perspectives on subissues?
eg in Australia at the moment there will be a vote whether to recognise Aboriginal people in the constitution. I think most will vote yes. Good. But I think that the way the change has been written it could remove Aboriginal land rights in the process. It would be good to be able to vote conditional yes that land rights are not broken.
What if two people delegate to one another, or people delegate around in circles?
Then they just vote with other people's votes
aggrevate vs aggregate - Freudian slip !?!?
yes, No Vote, and weighting rules.
Is the core motto, don't be evil?
David Wilkie it's a top joke
would people really trust google to run something like this?
if goggle is dictating what information people can access they will completely own the game. given that google is really about gaining the maximum amount of power and money this is very scary to me.
+PBrofaith who do will you trust, at airesis.eu we develop an open source e-democracy software but we can get it to be accepted because the political establishment is in direct competition and there is a strong conflict of interest.
by the way we have strong doubt on "liquid" democracy we prefer direct democracy
Jacopo Tolja thanks for that I will explore it more in a few days
"The Pirate Party was founded by the founders of the Pirate Bay".... No. This is simply not true. Stop lying.