Identity
Filter
Visitors
(0) (0) (0) (0) (1) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (0) (61) (0) (0) (0)Subscribers
(0) (0)
Highest posts
- 11/07 00:33 +1 Re: Smartocracy
- 10/07 10:55 +1 Re: Smartocracy
- 04/07 20:48 +1 Re: Smartocracy
- 03/07 17:40 +1 Re: Smartocracy
Latest posts
- 11/07 00:33 +1 Re: Smartocracy
- 10/07 10:55 +1 Re: Smartocracy
- 04/07 20:48 +1 Re: Smartocracy
- 03/07 17:40 +1 Re: Smartocracy
Links
Blogs
Democracy
Search
[top-politics] Re: Smartocracy
-
MG wrote:
> -Give me the basic facts/opinions abstracted that you wan’t to discuss, > we have limited amount of time.
-M: They are obviously supporters of RD. Find where thay are critical of DD, and we can discuss that.
shanti
Mark, Seattle WA USA
+1
-
http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~okram/papers/particle-modeling.pdf
-Hey, all I see is theoretical stuff about the power of pageranking in the internet?
http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~okram/papers/thesis.pdf
-OK, nothing here against individual participation. If all are participating, the decision errors are zero.
And it is good that non particpaters delegate their voting power. Can’t argue with that either.
What are you takling about???http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~okram/papers/humancollective-smc-hdm2004.pdf
-Same story again, what in it is against the AD-model?
All I see in these thesises is that the current system with representation is ineffective and that participation on the indivdual level is better.
Delegation is god but should be dynamic instead of static. No news here.
+1
-
MG wrote:
> http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~okram/papers/particle-modeling.pdf > > -Hey, all I see is theoretical stuff about the power of pageranking in > the internet? > > http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~okram/papers/thesis.pdf
-M: No, its not PageRanking the internet, its PageRanking human networks.
>mG: -OK, nothing here against individual participation. If all are participating, the decision errors are zero. And it is good that non particpaters delegate their voting power. Can’t argue with that either. What are you takling about???
-M: Marko Rodriguez(the writer) is a participant on Smartocracy. As soon as I get admission to the group, I will be challenging him on this point. He is a techie who doesn’t understand republicanism.
> http://www.soe.ucsc.edu/~okram/papers/humancollective-smc-hdm2004.pdf > >mG: -Same story again, what in it is against the AD-model?
-M: Because its not DD, its RD.
>mG: All I see in these thesises is that the current system with representation is ineffective and that participation on the indivdual level is better. Delegation is god but should be dynamic instead of static. No news here.
-M: Yes, SD2-Smartocracy would be participatory.
- There would be an option for a direct vote.
- There would be an option to choose delegates.
- If no delegates are chosen, delegate representation would be defaulted to one’s general trustee choices.
- If no general trustees are chosen, the algorithm chooses trustees.
Since leaders/representitives are needed even in a DD system, the only difference here is in the centrality algorithm of choice.(I said from the begining that the centrality algoritm is the main issue.)
shanti
Mark, Seattle WA USA
+1
-
Ju can call AD whatever you like but to mee smartocracy looks a lot
like AD. Point.
Let us know your success with Rodriquez…
+1
-
MG wrote:
> Ju can call AD whatever you like but to mee smartocracy looks a lot > like AD. Point.
-M: ‘looks a lot like AD’ – vague. Parlement/EC-D looks a lot like AD.
Any system under SD2 ‘looks a lot like AD’.So? Now lets talk about important details:
Initally, Smartocracy only selected general reps with PageRank.(like SD2)
Then it was changed to have specific issues with reps. My proposed SD2-Smartocracy would have both, with even a DD-like input option.Well? Do you like this?
>mG: Let us know your success with Rodriquez…
-M: OK.
shanti
Mark, Seattle WA USA
+1
-
-
-
