4 ms·

I like that idea voting for ideas instead of people.

hombre_fatal 6y ago
Not really sure I want to leave the country's future to the few people who can be bothered to pore over a bunch of a la carte laws and vote on each one. While it sounds good in theory, you're leaving the country to the same sort of crazy on NextDoor who has nothing better to do but peer out their blinds during the day to report the suspicious activity of someone walking their dog.
- winstonewert 6y ago
  I believe a core part of the idea is that you can delegate someone to control your vote unless you override them. Most people would choose someone whom they trust to make appropriate judgements and delegate their vote to them. So I think there would be a number of who specialize in evaluating these laws and it wouldn't be just a few crazy people.
  - jquery 6y ago
    I like the idea of having representation but being able to override my representative if I want. I really like that idea. We have the technology to implement it seamlessly now, if we wanted. I would find myself voting on a lot of issues I care about and ignoring the ones I don’t care about.
noirbot 6y ago
Some of the issue is that you're almost always still voting for people. People have to implement the ideas and make them happen. There's any number of policies that I'm in favor for if they worked perfectly, but I don't think they're feasible to implement or enforce using humans. You see this a lot in local elections where often there are specific ideas on the ballot for local people to vote on. I want to vote for "more public transit options" but it's not as if I'm voting for specific train lines or bus routes. That's before you get into the issue of who is coming up with the ideas to go on the ballot, how they word them, and how carefully they consider them. It's easy to make a lot of things sound good on the snippet you'll read on a ballot, but not prevent bad side effects that you wouldn't think about.
- chr1 6y ago
  There is a big difference between picking someone to be your boss and decide what needs to be done, and picking someone to work for you and try to implement what you think needs to be done. You are not going to read the idea on the ballot, you read them on internet, or propose them on a site similar to change.org, and then you have lots of opportunity to give feedback during the implementation. There will not be an option to vote for "more public transit options" Without the limitations of current voting system, there will not be useless votes like "more public transit options". Instead of that when you are stuck in traffic jam you'll create a proposal for a specific line, other people stuck in the same jam would support it, then your city will hold a competition with different companies proposing different solutions, then will be a vote to pick one of them.
gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
Good luck when we have people just vote themselves endless subsidies.
- chr1 6y ago
  Do you think that would be more likely than voting for socialists in the current system? I think the difference is that with direct voting when the endless subsidies ruin economy it will be easier to vote for something reasonable, instead of being stuck with someone like Maduro. The issue is the same as letting someone spend his own money, he may end up spending all of it on something stupid (like alcohol), and some people indeed do that, but most people end up spending rationally.
- anoncake 6y ago
  You'd get a poor failed state like Switzerland.
thrownblown 6y ago
I'd rather vote on implementation... Year 1: vote on idea Year 2: vote on ratification of idea as well as the committee members to design the implementation Year 3: we vote on which of the 3 - 5 design proposals the committee designed to implement as well as the executive team to implement the plan

Not really sure I want to leave the country's future to the few people who can be bothered to pore over a bunch of a la carte laws and vote on each one. While it sounds good in theory, you're leaving the country to the same sort of crazy on NextDoor who has nothing better to do but peer out their blinds during the day to report the suspicious activity of someone walking their dog.

winstonewert 6y ago
I believe a core part of the idea is that you can delegate someone to control your vote unless you override them. Most people would choose someone whom they trust to make appropriate judgements and delegate their vote to them. So I think there would be a number of who specialize in evaluating these laws and it wouldn't be just a few crazy people.
- jquery 6y ago
  I like the idea of having representation but being able to override my representative if I want. I really like that idea. We have the technology to implement it seamlessly now, if we wanted. I would find myself voting on a lot of issues I care about and ignoring the ones I don’t care about.

noirbot 6y ago

Some of the issue is that you're almost always still voting for people. People have to implement the ideas and make them happen. There's any number of policies that I'm in favor for if they worked perfectly, but I don't think they're feasible to implement or enforce using humans. You see this a lot in local elections where often there are specific ideas on the ballot for local people to vote on. I want to vote for "more public transit options" but it's not as if I'm voting for specific train lines or bus routes. That's before you get into the issue of who is coming up with the ideas to go on the ballot, how they word them, and how carefully they consider them. It's easy to make a lot of things sound good on the snippet you'll read on a ballot, but not prevent bad side effects that you wouldn't think about.

chr1 6y ago
There is a big difference between picking someone to be your boss and decide what needs to be done, and picking someone to work for you and try to implement what you think needs to be done. You are not going to read the idea on the ballot, you read them on internet, or propose them on a site similar to change.org, and then you have lots of opportunity to give feedback during the implementation. There will not be an option to vote for "more public transit options" Without the limitations of current voting system, there will not be useless votes like "more public transit options". Instead of that when you are stuck in traffic jam you'll create a proposal for a specific line, other people stuck in the same jam would support it, then your city will hold a competition with different companies proposing different solutions, then will be a vote to pick one of them.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago

Good luck when we have people just vote themselves endless subsidies.

chr1 6y ago
Do you think that would be more likely than voting for socialists in the current system? I think the difference is that with direct voting when the endless subsidies ruin economy it will be easier to vote for something reasonable, instead of being stuck with someone like Maduro. The issue is the same as letting someone spend his own money, he may end up spending all of it on something stupid (like alcohol), and some people indeed do that, but most people end up spending rationally.
anoncake 6y ago
You'd get a poor failed state like Switzerland.

thrownblown 6y ago

I'd rather vote on implementation... Year 1: vote on idea Year 2: vote on ratification of idea as well as the committee members to design the implementation Year 3: we vote on which of the 3 - 5 design proposals the committee designed to implement as well as the executive team to implement the plan