Identity
Filter
Visitors
(0) (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
- 02/08 03:34 +1 Re: What does TOP mean to you? #02
- 02/08 02:34 +1 Re: What does TOP mean to you? #02
Latest posts
- 02/08 03:34 +1 Re: What does TOP mean to you? #02
- 02/08 02:34 +1 Re: What does TOP mean to you? #02
Links
Blogs
Democracy
Search
[top-politics] Re: What does TOP mean to you? #02
-
MG wrote:
> ">mG: -In AD they control as much as their mandate from the voters give > them. > > -M: Which could lead to too much concentration of power. This is why I > label boards of five in SD2 as ‘normal mode’ to discourage > concentrations of power to smaller groups. "
> -You have a point here. In Ad we actually don’t give this problem so > much thought yet. But it is possible to solve by maximising the percentage of the votes for one delegate o 20% or so.
-M: There could be a vote on the percentage limit. SD2-Smartocracy makes the PageRank of the decision decisive, and there is a vote on the number of executive committee members – 1, 3, or 5, and there is no rule against these executives also being among the highest legislators – very parliamentary.
>mG: In AD case delegation also can be made to an organization which makes things a little more complicated. If this organization is a political party, things might be as today. The important difference is the instant drawback of the delegation…which stresses the best from all delegates apart from today. And the fact that a delegation can be only for socfic issues, such as energy or environment, or for all issues for a certain time. In this way AD wan’t[wants] to give the citizens all possible levels of DD down to pure RD.
-M: By contrast SD2-Smartocracy is always extreme RD, because DD discourages PD by spreading peoples’ power to thinly. With SD2-S, particants are rewarded with rank – this rewards efforts with decisiveness.
> "-M: OK. We all seem to want PD and speedy replacements of those in power positions. "
>mG: -A key issue!
-M: PD or replacements? We seem to be in agreement on both, so the only issue seems to be how we communicate our opinions.
shanti
Mark, Seattle WA USA
+1
-
“> "-M: OK. We all seem to want PD and speedy replacements of those in power positions. " >mG: -A key issue!
-M: PD or replacements? We seem to be in agreement on both, so the only
issue seems to be how we communicate our opinions. "
Both!
I really think that we could reach common agreement if you only stopped the L-words…
+1
-
MG wrote:
> "> "-M: OK. We all seem to want PD and speedy replacements of those in power positions. " > >mG: -A key issue!
> -M: PD or replacements? We seem to be in agreement on both, so the only issue seems to be how we communicate our opinions. "
>mG: Both! I really think that we could reach common agreement…
-M: You do have delegates – this is RD in practice. Political structures would be built around them.
Can delegates delegate to other delegates as with Parlement/EC-D?
If the depth of this delegation is unlimited, you will need a reiterative centrality algorithm like PageRank.
So far, Emmanuel has said that the way he would avoid having to use PageRank was to forbid delegates from voting for each other. How? Chronological priviliging? What about loops? Emmanuel keeps DODGING and would rather talk about the World Cup than mathematics or his constant contradictions. And why do users of his delegable proxy constraints have:
- only one delegate?
- a choice of delegate OR a position?
By contrast, SD2-Smartocracy offers:
- a trustee or
- trustees and/or
- a delegate or
- delegates and/or
- issue choice and/or
- decision thresholds
This gives maximum choice to the voter without arbitrariness. This identifies the expert opinion for each decision. This also identifies a body of generalists to act as political organizers and high administrators.
>mG:…if you only stopped the L-words…
-M: Emmanullemmings – they get in the way of participatory democracy. Now an “E”-word.
shanti
Mark, Seattle WA USA
+1
-
-
