[p2p-research] programming a direct democracy

Wed Jul 2 02:46:04 CEST 2008

Greetings from Dublin, middle of the night...

Yes, so in Open Source it is great that whoever can understand the
code and invest time in programming can participate, those two things
function like a good barrier to enter the system. (Since a project is
interested in exactly the kind of programmers: who understand what
they need to do and have time to do it.) But with legislation or other
situations where the question is about power, I see it as almost a
recipe for disaster to say that those who are the loudest ones and can
afford to spend more time arguing than some other people, will
eventually wear out the opposition and have the decisionmaking power
for themselves. The difference with Open Source is that you can always
choose to ignore a long winded discussion and choose to do productive
work instead. I don't see how political decisionmaking could share
that feature.

That being said, it is obviously true that a good voting system with
no system for debate would be a hilarious thing too! (Random
decisionmaking, almost?) So you need to have a system for good debate
or deliberation too, but the power must not reside in the debate. You
must be able to ignore the debate and still retain your share of
power. Thus, you must be able to delegate your power so it is being
used even if you don't invest your own time.

I couldn't resist browsing the www.aktivdemokrati.se site a bit and it
seems they have thought about this part quite a lot. For instance, the
time a vote is open fluctuates depending on its activity. It is
designed to make stupid proposals just go away and good ones to get
approved when there are enough votes. Really interesting and there is
an English FAQ at least.

(Unlike myself, where I have thought more about the voting and
delegation of that, assuming that Internet is good at organizing
communication so I was never worried about that, kinda skipped that
part.)

henrik

On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
> As I understand it, deliberative democracy is based on selecting (through
> self-selection or trying to have a representative sample) a restricted
> numbers of participants who can process the complex information for the
> benefit of others?
>
> As I see it, online deliberation can scale, but local-physical deliberation
> has to take place in smaller groups to be effective.
>
> I think it takes place 'before voting', so the critique of non-delegation
> would not apply. Both approaches are compatible.
>
> http://p2pfoundation.net/Deliberative_Democracy
>
> Michel
>
> On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 3:59 AM, Josef Davies-Coates
> <josef at uniteddiversity.com> wrote:
>>
>> Correct if I'm wrong but I think all Henrik was saying is that
>> deliberation without the option to (I assume automatically, algorithmically)
>> delegate your decision making power to someone else (ala Liquid Democracy/
>> Delegative Democracy or similarly Smartocracy) who you trust on the matter
>> isn't as inclusive as a system that does have that option.
>>
>> Not that we should completely dismiss deliberation.
>>
>> Josef.
>>
>> 2008/6/30 Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Glad it was of use anyway, though I think your blanket dismissal of
>>> deliberation is too radical!!
>>>
>>> We need both direct and deliberative,
>>>
>>> Michel
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 1:40 AM, Henrik Ingo <henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Michel,
>>>>
>>>> This was a nice link, though not perhaps for the reason you describe:
>>>>
>>>> I'm packing for a week-long business trip, so the whole article was
>>>> too long for me to read now. However, I was glimpsing through it, and
>>>> stopped when it talked about sitting in assembly raising hands.
>>>> Clearly this is not what I'm interested in with my system. (Academic
>>>> writing style gives me headache too!)
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the technique proposed could be modified to a useful tool for
>>>> "my" direct democracy society, perhaps... or not. In general I think
>>>> "Deliberative Direct Democracy" ideas are misguided, since the
>>>> fundamental assumption that people can or should spend all their lives
>>>> debating legislation is false. (And since it is false it means that
>>>> those who can spend the most time end up with most influence, which I
>>>> consider a flaw.)
>>>>
>>>> But, the first comment leads to a very interesting Swedish party, with
>>>> analogous ideas to myself. I should be in touch with them sometime.
>>>> This is what I wanted to thank you for :-)
>>>>
>>>> henrik
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Michel Bauwens
>>>> <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > http://efficasync.blogspot.com/2007/07/programming-deliberative-direct.html
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi Henrik,
>>>> >
>>>> > re your presentation in nottingham,
>>>> >
>>>> > I wonder if you could not report on the following on the blog, or
>>>> > invite
>>>> > Mark to do so?
>>>> >
>>>> > Efficasync - How to Program a Direct Democracy
>>>> >
>>>> > Programming a Deliberative Direct-Democracy.
>>>> > A Method of Open-Source Self-Governance.
>>>> >
>>>> > SUMMARY
>>>> >
>>>> > Michael Mussman
>>>> > --
>>>> > The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
>>>> > alternatives.
>>>> >
>>>> > Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
>>>> > http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
>>>> > http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
>>>> >
>>>> > Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview
>>>> > at
>>>> >
>>>> > http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
>>>> > BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
>>>> >
>>>> > http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
>>>> >
>>>> > KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at
>>>> > http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>>> >
>>>> > The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>>>> > http://www.shiftn.com/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> email: henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi
>>>> tel: +358-40-5697354
>>>> www: www.avoinelama.fi/~hingo
>>>> book: www.openlife.cc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
>>> alternatives.
>>>
>>> Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
>>> http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
>>>
>>> Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
>>> http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
>>> BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
>>> http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
>>>
>>> KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>>>
>>> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
>>> http://www.shiftn.com/
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Josef Davies-Coates
>> 07974 88 88 95
>> http://uniteddiversity.com
>> Together We Have Everything
>
>
> --
> The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
> alternatives.
>
> Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
> http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p
>
> Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
> http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
> BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
> http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
>
> KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/

-- 
email: henrik.ingo at avoinelama.fi
tel: +358-40-5697354
www: www.avoinelama.fi/~hingo
book: www.openlife.cc