E-Democracy

[AFK]

Okay, so I have THOUSANDS of people in these two cities who don't have proper transportation to put fucking food on their table.  And you expect that these people are somehow going to find a way to sit down in front of the 12 or 13 public computers available at the library?  Oh, and before that even happens, you're going to need someone to educate these, mostly uneducated people, how to use this E-democracy thing, right after they are taught how to use the computer. 

So, I suggest that the first thing you need to do, CU, before you champion this idea, is do a little research on the poor, imporverished, illiterate people in this country and then really think how this is going to serve them.  And then if you still want to go ahead, and if you want to make sure these people are represented, you better prepare yourself to be writing grants 24/7 to get the funding to pay for the transportation and the social services that will be required to educate these people on Politics, Computers, and e-public policy.  You think you're going to be able to swing all of that?  Did you even consider all of that? 

Welcome to the real world.  It's peaches and sunshine I tell you. 

[Doktor Howl]

Okay, so I have THOUSANDS of people in these two cities who don't have proper transportation to put fucking food on their table.  And you expect that these people are somehow going to find a way to sit down in front of the 12 or 13 public computers available at the library?  Oh, and before that even happens, you're going to need someone to educate these, mostly uneducated people, how to use this E-democracy thing, right after they are taught how to use the computer. 

So, I suggest that the first thing you need to do, CU, before you champion this idea, is do a little research on the poor, imporverished, illiterate people in this country and then really think how this is going to serve them.  And then if you still want to go ahead, and if you want to make sure these people are represented, you better prepare yourself to be writing grants 24/7 to get the funding to pay for the transportation and the social services that will be required to educate these people on Politics, Computers, and e-public policy.  You think you're going to be able to swing all of that?  Did you even consider all of that? 

Welcome to the real world.  It's peaches and sunshine I tell you. 

It will all done for God. Or Allah. Or The Perfect State™. Or communism. Or Capitalism and "free" markets. Or the superior tribe's right to expand. Or the superior race's need for cultural purity. It is the Holy Peoples' Will, and though unfortunate, these things must be done, do you understand? You can't make omelets without breaking eggs, and you can't make Big Things happen without squishing a few poor people.

And the trains will all run on time.

[AFK]

But nobody elects them.  Why?  Possibly because of brainwashing, but another possibility is that just because the 3rd parties are funnier, doesn't mean they're better.

Duverger's Law.  No exceptions.

I dunno though.  Is the green party really that hysterical compared to dems or repubs?

Funnier.  They're full of not-ready-for prime time players.  One of their idiots, whose name is Jonathan Carter, championed this bill in Maine to ban clearcutting in the forests.  Sounds nice right?  Until you read the details.  The bill would've mandated that all of the slash from harvesting be left where it was cut.  Slash is basically the branches and twigs that get cut off the log after the tree is harvested.  Now, a bunch of branches on the forest floor, plus really dry and hot conditions like we're having now would result in mega forest fire of epic proportions. 

I sat in on one of their meetings once and they were basically just picking people out of the audience to run for some of the local offices.  No questions about experience or initiatives.  It was like they were 3rd graders playing government.  Fucking hilarious. 

[Doktor Howl]

I always had a soft spot for the American Family Party.

Nice folks, but they don't even have a website.  I think they run it out of a shoebox in Cleveland.

[Captain Utopia]

Okay, so I have THOUSANDS of people in these two cities who don't have proper transportation to put fucking food on their table.  And you expect that these people are somehow going to find a way to sit down in front of the 12 or 13 public computers available at the library?  Oh, and before that even happens, you're going to need someone to educate these, mostly uneducated people, how to use this E-democracy thing, right after they are taught how to use the computer. 

So, I suggest that the first thing you need to do, CU, before you champion this idea, is do a little research on the poor, imporverished, illiterate people in this country and then really think how this is going to serve them.  And then if you still want to go ahead, and if you want to make sure these people are represented, you better prepare yourself to be writing grants 24/7 to get the funding to pay for the transportation and the social services that will be required to educate these people on Politics, Computers, and e-public policy.  You think you're going to be able to swing all of that?  Did you even consider all of that? 

Welcome to the real world.  It's peaches and sunshine I tell you. 

Do we wait until we have full literacy before we start building libraries?

Do we wait until everyone can pay their medical bills before continuing with medical research?

I hate to break this to you RWHN, but Utopia doesn't exist.  An E-Democracy system may be incrementally better than what comes before it, but it will not magically solve all of the problems created by its predecessor before it is even implemented.  So let's take this fairlyland off the table right now shall we?

Great - now tell me what is wrong with the proxy vote system I've described whereby a charity which represents a clients interest can get or place their proxy vote such that they will be further empowered to support their clients and form a voting bloc?  Here - sign this piece of paper - done.

Tell me this - roughly what percentage of the group you are talking about currently participate in elections? 

[Doktor Howl]

Do we wait until we have full literacy before we start building libraries?

Do we wait until everyone can pay their medical bills before continuing with medical research?

Do we toss out a system of government in favor of some half-finished, nebulous "solution" that doesn't actually fix anything?

[Captain Utopia]

Do we think that anyone is suggesting that?

[AFK]

Okay, so I have THOUSANDS of people in these two cities who don't have proper transportation to put fucking food on their table.  And you expect that these people are somehow going to find a way to sit down in front of the 12 or 13 public computers available at the library?  Oh, and before that even happens, you're going to need someone to educate these, mostly uneducated people, how to use this E-democracy thing, right after they are taught how to use the computer. 

So, I suggest that the first thing you need to do, CU, before you champion this idea, is do a little research on the poor, imporverished, illiterate people in this country and then really think how this is going to serve them.  And then if you still want to go ahead, and if you want to make sure these people are represented, you better prepare yourself to be writing grants 24/7 to get the funding to pay for the transportation and the social services that will be required to educate these people on Politics, Computers, and e-public policy.  You think you're going to be able to swing all of that?  Did you even consider all of that? 

Welcome to the real world.  It's peaches and sunshine I tell you. 

Do we wait until we have full literacy before we start building libraries?

Do we wait until everyone can pay their medical bills before continuing with medical research?

I hate to break this to you RWHN, but Utopia doesn't exist.  An E-Democracy system may be incrementally better than what comes before it, but it will not magically solve all of the problems created by its predecessor before it is even implemented.  So let's take this fairlyland off the table right now shall we?

Great - now tell me what is wrong with the proxy vote system I've described whereby a charity which represents a clients interest can get or place their proxy vote such that they will be further empowered to support their clients and form a voting bloc?  Here - sign this piece of paper - done.

Tell me this - roughly what percentage of the group you are talking about currently participate in elections? 

What's wrong with it?  It is a massive invite to corruption.  I can just see the "charities" who get people to give up their vote in exchange for some services.  Again, you don't seem to understand the compouding issue of literacy and education.  The people who arent voting in the first place, how do you expect them to understand this proxy business to give proper and INFORMED consent? 

[AFK]

Do we think that anyone is suggesting that?

Yes.  You.  You clearly haven't thought everything through. 

[Doktor Howl]

Do we think that anyone is suggesting that?

I think that's exactly what you're suggesting.

RWHN has brought up several valid points.  You have ignored or sidestepped them, because you are now wedded to this, and no amount of problems inherent in the system you're espousing will change your mind.

You're a convert, and there's nobody more zealous.  The facts don't matter, reality doesn't matter.  Just The Cause.

[Captain Utopia]

What's wrong with it?  It is a massive invite to corruption.  I can just see the "charities" who get people to give up their vote in exchange for some services.  Again, you don't seem to understand the compouding issue of literacy and education.  The people who arent voting in the first place, how do you expect them to understand this proxy business to give proper and INFORMED consent? 

Sure - that might happen.  There is a very limited risk to that though.  Since you can log-in and change your vote as often as you want, you cannot be tied to a particular proxy vote.  I'm assuming these people aren't stupid though, and so if a scam is discovered that news will spread quickly enough.  There simply isn't enough motivation to run such a scam with your real identity though.

Bottom line - I'd be satisfied if this system could represent more disadvantaged people than currently participate in the existing system.  Do you have stats on that?

An incremental benefit is all I'm looking for, not some utopian perfect ideal system.

Do we think that anyone is suggesting that?

I think that's exactly what you're suggesting.

Then you simply haven't been paying attention.

From the OP, Implementation Section:

Once you have the software you have to create a movement behind it.  Personally I don't see this as a major challenge, because there are enough people involved in metagovernment now to prove that it can work in a small-medium scale, such as running a company or cooperative organisation/charity.  If you have a working demonstration, and not just theory, it's a lot easier to convince people that there is some value to what you propose.  I expect very few people to read this, for example, even those who have participated in the debate so far, and as such the idea is an almost impossible sell to a wider public who have no other reason to care.

So the obvious next step is to target local government, such as with Senator On-Line in Austrailia, and a host of other projects around the world.

The examples I gave there are precisely what I was suggesting, not to "toss out a system of government in favor of some half-finished, nebulous "solution" that doesn't actually fix anything".  The SOL project only elects a single Senator and doesn't come anywhere close to tossing out a system of government.

RWHN has brought up several valid points.  You have ignored or sidestepped them, because you are now wedded to this, and no amount of problems inherent in the system you're espousing will change your mind.

Like what?

You're a convert, and there's nobody more zealous.  The facts don't matter, reality doesn't matter.  Just The Cause.

Really, that's where you want to go with this?  Let's stick to the issues - no need to start casting personal aspersions.

[Captain Utopia]

Do we think that anyone is suggesting that?

Yes.  You.  You clearly haven't thought everything through. 

Of course I haven't.  Did I say I had?  The point of this thread is to discuss what I have thought through, and to work out the details of the parts I haven't.

[Jasper]

I've tried bringing unfinished ideas to PD before.  It's not really...effective.  You end up defending something as you build it, and it becomes something you never would have wanted.  I'd take it back to the lab, and start a new thread when you have something a bit more airtight, because we prefer taking things apart.

Merely stating a subjective truth.

[Captain Utopia]

I have absolutely no problem with people trying to take this apart.  I welcome it.  The scale that I was covering in the implementation was limited to local government though:

So the obvious next step is to target local government, such as with Senator On-Line in Austrailia, and a host of other projects around the world.

With the proxy-voting method applied to candidates, and not just issues, this could interface with an existing power structure like this:



In addition, you have the potential to allow the institutional power structure to reflect the actual voting which took place:




That's all well and good.  But all we are doing here is filling positions for elected officials.  The next step is to elect officials who will honour the resolutions as decided by the E-Democracy software system.  I don't think this would take much more additional momentum to achieve.

And from there the implementation plan becomes more vague.  In theory working out the kinks and quirks at the smaller scales will allow it to scale up to handle larger tasks.  I'm too cynical to believe it will be quite that simple though.

I'm happy with my responses to Charley and RWHN with regards that an E-Democracy system will be able to provide enhanced value to the computer literate, while providing a representational service to others which is at least as good as that which they currently have.

So while I find talking about the potential benefits of applying E-Democracy to a national or global scale interesting, I don't see problems at those scales to be roadblocks at this stage as I'm only really focused on kickstarting it into the scale of local-government -- if that's all it ever accomplished, that would still be an incremental benefit worth having!

[AFK]

What's wrong with it?  It is a massive invite to corruption.  I can just see the "charities" who get people to give up their vote in exchange for some services.  Again, you don't seem to understand the compouding issue of literacy and education.  The people who arent voting in the first place, how do you expect them to understand this proxy business to give proper and INFORMED consent? 

Sure - that might happen.  There is a very limited risk to that though.  Since you can log-in and change your vote as often as you want, you cannot be tied to a particular proxy vote.  I'm assuming these people aren't stupid though, and so if a scam is discovered that news will spread quickly enough.  There simply isn't enough motivation to run such a scam with your real identity though.

You didn't address the issue of informed consent or the issues of people understanding the proxy system.  You also haven't addressed my point of people not being able to find transportation for basics like shopping for food yet you think somehow they are going to get all the way across the city to the library to participate in your e-democracy, that they don't even understand.  You also haven't addressed the issue of cities having the capacities to engage the disadvantaged to educate them and to get them to places with computers.  So how do you address the capacity issues?

Lastly, this idea of changing you vote whenever you want to invites a whole host of problems.  Elected local officials could be recalled at any time.  You would make local govenment TOO fluid, and nothing would get done.  Government does require some level of institutional knowledge.  Fighting gridlock with complete fluidity is not the way to go.