4 ms·

I love the thought put into this, and I have done years of thinking on similar topics... but let me ask you a point-blank question: do you seriously- seriously

I love the thought put into this, and I have done years of thinking on similar topics... but let me ask you a point-blank question: do you seriously- seriously - believe for one instant that clarity on majority desire would be any less malleable than it is currently? Do you think that those that are promised free <blank> or tightened regulation/penalty/restriction on whatever their religious or cultural morals dictate would not do as they do now: vote for what benefits them, and ignore the repercussions? The answer of how to balance a budget is as simple for a government as it is for you and me: don't spend more than you have. So what does your network vote to cut? How can that be peacefully decided? What will those that claim "disenfranchisement" do? Please understand, I am heartened to see this topic here, and I, like you, want to work toward a better system of government. I just see human nature working against any centralized power system, as those least deserving of the power always work hardest to yield it. Good conversation. Good group involved. I am glad to see your group thinking on this incredibly important issue. P

maxbRuns 15y ago
It's true- no technology can change people's tendency to act in their own self-interest and vote for what benefits them. Individuals can't be expected to take into account the needs of the whole society. That's the the job of the voting system; it should take as input a set of selfish individual preferences, and produce the fairest possible group decision. Our goal with Hyperarchy is to build a system that can achieve greater fairness. Clearly, the current electoral process has problems that lead to injustices. As a society, we need to move toward a more advanced system, and it's not going to happen unless we build some and experiment with them. I appreciate your thoughts very much. I hope you'll try our site, and share any further feedback.
- phyllotaxis 15y ago
  I think you're on the right train of thought. One suggestion I would offer regards the intended result. How about taking the "set of selfish individual preferences" and route them go a variety of solutions both public and private? Instead of attempting to channel everything through government in a more optimal way, which is a laudable goal, give people more ways to solve the issues that currently may seem confined to government intervention. I view every person as an agent acting in their own best interest. Why not view the answers given as avenues for groups and organizations to market their services to? Maybe you're creating a democratic system that let's people say exactly what they want, and define what they will pay for it. Again, just musings- but I'm happy to have found you and your efforts.

maxbRuns 15y ago

It's true- no technology can change people's tendency to act in their own self-interest and vote for what benefits them. Individuals can't be expected to take into account the needs of the whole society. That's the the job of the voting system; it should take as input a set of selfish individual preferences, and produce the fairest possible group decision. Our goal with Hyperarchy is to build a system that can achieve greater fairness. Clearly, the current electoral process has problems that lead to injustices. As a society, we need to move toward a more advanced system, and it's not going to happen unless we build some and experiment with them. I appreciate your thoughts very much. I hope you'll try our site, and share any further feedback.

phyllotaxis 15y ago
I think you're on the right train of thought. One suggestion I would offer regards the intended result. How about taking the "set of selfish individual preferences" and route them go a variety of solutions both public and private? Instead of attempting to channel everything through government in a more optimal way, which is a laudable goal, give people more ways to solve the issues that currently may seem confined to government intervention. I view every person as an agent acting in their own best interest. Why not view the answers given as avenues for groups and organizations to market their services to? Maybe you're creating a democratic system that let's people say exactly what they want, and define what they will pay for it. Again, just musings- but I'm happy to have found you and your efforts.