[liberationtech] Stability in truly "Democratic" decision systems

[Mitar]

Hi!

On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Peter Lindener <lindener.peter at gmail.com> wrote:
> At his point, while we could have discussions about how best to resolve these
> cyclically ranked majority.....

It seems that you are assuming that the possibility of cyclically
ranked majority is the biggest issue with democracy? I could argue
that the biggest issue is assumption that we can based on preferences
of individuals determine what would be the best for the group as a
whole. Why exactly would this be related? Why exactly if we know what
each individual wants for him or herself, we would know what would be
best for the group? (For any definition of "best".) Of course you get
conflicts and cycles if everyone looks only at his or her own
interests.

I found it a bit premature optimization that we are concerned how to
optimize voting among given choices when we should be maybe more
concerned how the choices are constructed. Because this is the big
question. Not how can we find fancy ways to sum up the votes among
given options.

The issue is that we are always given options to choose from. But we
are hardly ever consulted in preparation of those options. Is this
really democracy? To be allowed to vote which among two kings or
queens (or hundred or whatever number) will rule you for next four or
five years? Beautiful.

So my question is more: how can we get new ideas and new solutions to
issues from participation of everybody? How can we get people to be
able to contribute to the solution to the issue, not just to choose
among provided solutions?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUS1m5MSt9k


Mitar

-- 
http://mitar.tnode.com/
https://twitter.com/mitar_m