[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization

[top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization http://leparlement.org/Re_Definition_of_TOP_Systematization_96/index.rss [top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization [top-politics] Re: Definition of TOP - Systematization 2006-12-07 20:17:49+0100 http://leparlement.org/Re_Definition_of_TOP_Systematization_97/index.rss http://leparlement.org/Re_Definition_of_TOP_Systematization_97/index.rss Mark Rosst <p><p>[...] > >> ><del>M: Yes, but you are spreading the accountability way too thinly. :</del>( > >mG: -This is claimed by you, please proove it. > > I could argue that the people of Switzerland, or Socrates probably > > wouldn’t agree with you. > > >-M: When two wolves and one sheep vote for whats for dinner, the wolves > are not accountable to the sheep. Do you want to be the sheep? > Likewise, do you want to be ruled by lemmings?</p> <blockquote> <p>mG:[...] the comparison with wolfs and sheep is nonsence since we are discussing equal righted humans…</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: Which is why, with <span class="caps">SD2</span>-S, that everyone initially has equal voting power.<br/> <span class="caps">SD2</span>-S is <strong>democratic</strong>-republicanism.</p> <blockquote> <p>mG:...with possibility to be anonymous. And the bill of rights is not existent for the sheep. Neither are there laws, <span class="caps">TOP</span> or media to cover the dinner of the wolfes.</p> </blockquote> <p><a class="readMore" href="#" onclick="Element.hide(this); Element.removeClassName(this.parentNode.nextSibling, 'tooLarge'); return false;">Read more… / Lire plus…</a> <div class="tooLarge"></p> <p>-M: If AD uses the lemming algorithm, then the wolves can dupe the lemmings into a dinner.</p> <blockquote> <blockquote> <blockquote> <p>mG: But not all can be solved by expendable top. Some issues are best handled by broad participation…</p> </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>-M: ”...broad participation…” can be useful, and this is allowed and even encouraged by <span class="caps">SD2</span>-S.</p> </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>mG: -Well, whats mainly encouraged in <span class="caps">SD2</span> is voting for a rep. I would say. AD is doing it the other way around, with the possibility for a delegate. But this is my last comparison with systems that actually can bothe be options in a future <span class="caps">TOP</span> organization or country government. This debate is not leading to anywhere.</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: You said “SD2” – and yes, this is for selecting reps. But the system I am talking about is <strong><span class="caps">SD2</span>-S</strong>, which has specialists for every issue,<br/> so this functions much like your ‘delegates’ of AD. Again, I don’t see the comparison.</p> <blockquote> <blockquote> <p>-M: In a DD, the lemmings are not accountable to the other lemmings and non-lemmings, just as with the wolf/sheep example. (I got this from the revolutionary Ben Franklin.)</p> </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>mG: -Ben was wrong and he knew it.</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: Franklin and Hamilton were the best anti-imperialists this world has seen.<br/> Gandhi and Nehru were populistic wussies by comparison.</p> <blockquote> <p>mG: He just needed to justify his own and other reps. future power. There is no logic in this since the lemmings in a RD are not neither accountable to each other. So they can go and elect Hitler.</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: Again, the debate isn’t RD vs DD, its lemming-algorithm vs Markov-algorithms,<br/> and in the above example it is the lemming-algorithm which selected Hitler.<br/> So this is a point against you, and not me.</p> <blockquote> <p>mG: By contrast either you or Franklin has a similar example to show for DD. Just BS theory frankly.</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: You keep attacking L-RD. You are attacking the lemming algorithm which supports DD. I will let you continue to whup yourself.</p> <blockquote> <blockquote> <blockquote> <p>mG: -The people will never allow corruption if they see it and a possibility to remove it, this is prooven many times in history…</p> </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>-M: <span class="caps">EVERY SINGLE FORM OF CORRUPTION</span>, WITHOUT <span class="caps">EXCEPTION</span>, HAS <span class="caps">BEEN</span> CORRUPTION <span class="caps">ALLOWED BY THE PEOPLE</span>.</p> </blockquote> <p>mG: -As smart as saying that a burglar would meet no resistance in peoples homes. Explain why anybody would accept stealing of his property?</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: Ignorance and lack of vigilence. This is why intelligent and vigilent people must be selected to lead government.<br/> This is why <span class="caps">SD2</span>-S has a peer-endorsement algorithm.</p> <blockquote> <blockquote> <p>-M: Its your BS. What is needed is a mechanism to find those that are counter-corruption because the people as a mass can’t do it.</p> </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>mG: -It will be impossible within a true <span class="caps">TOP</span> organization to steal. Your problem is how a rep can be fully <span class="caps">TOP</span> since he can’t be followed and tapped 24/7. Concentate on solving that instead.</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: I envision <span class="caps">SD2</span>-S to be <span class="caps">TOP</span> complient, so you aren’t making a comparison again.</p> <blockquote> <blockquote> <blockquote> <p>mG: Maybe your invented people of lemmmings acts differently.</p> </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>-M: No differently than their lemminghood of history.</p> </blockquote> </blockquote> <blockquote> <p>mG: -???Empty words again about the history. Where are the relevant examples?</p> </blockquote> <p>-M: The bottom 50% percent of income earners in the world own only 1% of the world.<br/> This is a result of lemmingism.</p> <p>shanti<br/> Mark, Seattle <span class="caps">WA USA</span></p> <p><del>-<sub></del>-</sub><del>—</del>-<del>—</del><sub><del>-</sub></del>-<del>-<sub></del>-<del>—</del>-<del>—</del>-</sub><del>—</del>-<del>-<sub></del>-</sub><del>—</del>~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups “top-politics” group. To post to this group, send email to <a href="mailto:top-politics@googlegroups.com">top-politics@googlegroups.com</a> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to <a href="mailto:top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com">top-politics-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a> For more options, visit this group at <a href="http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics?hl=en">http://groups.google.com/group/top-politics?hl=en</a> <del><sub>-</del>-<del>—</del>-<del>-</sub></del>-<del>-<sub></del>-<del>-</sub></del>-<del>-<sub></del>-<del>—</del></sub><del>—</del><sub><del>—</del>-<del></sub>-</del>~<del>-</del></p> </div></p>