4 ms·
The delegate only needs to know how many votes they have to cast, not who the votes belong to. In fact, they don't even need to know that if another organizatio
by guerrilla 4y ago
The delegate only needs to know how many votes they have to cast, not who the votes belong to. In fact, they don't even need to know that if another organization has that information. They would just say "I use the votes delegated to me, however many, and by whomever, to vote yes (or no) on X"
- X6S1x6Okd1st 4y agoBut the delegator would want to know how their delegate voted. It's much better to buy votes from someone who has lots of delegations
- guerrilla 4y agoToo bad for them? If that's really what people want, then they don't have to have secret ballot, and then they have vote buying. Such are tradeoffs.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- X6S1x6Okd1st 4y agoYeah it really is too bad, I'm excited for the potential of liquid democracy, but pretty sad that the most important tool for preventing vote buying is seriously limited in liquid democracy.
- guerrilla 4y agoBut we just establisged it's not.
- X6S1x6Okd1st 4y agoCould you elaborate? My understanding is either you know how your delegate voted and vote buying is likely a large problem or you don't know how you delegate voted so it's hard to impossible to actually trust that you've delegated as you intended to.