A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive • Hacker News Board

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#151

Post by zorked » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:08 PM UTC

breuleux wrote: post #141

superkarn wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would this have a similar outcome as the "lottery" for jury duty? What happens if somebody who really doesn't want to do it is chosen?

That's a very good point. I currently lean towards requiring every citizen to register for the lottery once every ten or so years (for one year of service). If they are picked, they have to go, except for serious unforeseen circumstances, but at least they would be able to plan for it to some extent. This might also require a cultural shift for people to accept it, but maybe not a radical one.

Being government for a year is a better deal than military service, and people don't complain too much about that.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#152

Post by benmmurphy » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:09 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #67

forinti wrote: post #66

The greeks had two institutions we could use: ostracism and lottery. We should be able to vote on those we want out of politics and the most voted would have to seat it out. And a small portion of representatives should be chosen by lottery. Maybe 5% or 10%. These representatives, obviously, would not have to answer to their sponsors.

Those were always pretty interesting ideas to me, and I always used to wonder why the Founders did not replicate those facets of the Athenian Republic? It would solve a lot of our problems today.

Someone who has political aspirations is unlikely to push for a system where the political jobs are allocated by lottery.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#153

Post by amiune » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:10 PM UTC

I propose something better than any voting method: try to achieve perfect information

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#154

Post by yongjik » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:16 PM UTC

forinti wrote: post #66

The greeks had two institutions we could use: ostracism and lottery. We should be able to vote on those we want out of politics and the most voted would have to seat it out. And a small portion of representatives should be chosen by lottery. Maybe 5% or 10%. These representatives, obviously, would not have to answer to their sponsors.

Imagine Google or Facebook hiring 5% of their developers by lottery. Take all applicants, no questions asked, pick randomly.

I can't fathom why people think "managing a country" requires less skills than managing servers. The consequences of hiring someone unqualified is certainly not less severe.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#155

Post by mbostleman » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:27 PM UTC

>>The purpose...is to determine “whether the intense preferences of the minority outweigh the weak preferences of the majority”>>

Given this, apparently the problem is that strong minority preferences are being snuffed out by majority preferences? Of course, this is the inherent flaw in democracy.

In the US we have two guards against that - the first is the Electoral College and the second is the Constitution. The former ensures that even the least populated states have at least a minimum (as opposed to effectively none) effect on the outcome and the second ensures that the government can't be used for something evil just because a majority has voted to to use it for that purpose.

So if there's a "zealotry" problem as the title implies, why can't these tools be used to manage it? What is wrong with them such that we need this new, additional layer?

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#156

Post by kro92kfmrzz » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:28 PM UTC

marricks wrote: post #42

I always hate the framing as “polarized”. There’s tons of things Democrats and Republicans agree on. Military spending goes up every year. Save for Dodd-Frank, deregulation has been common across presidencies for 30 years along with corporate tax cuts... The establishment gets things done, they really do, it’s just not things that help everyday people. I’m not sure how this would help that.

Basically they disagree on how to treat their fellow citizens.

Democrats are against outright hostility and blatant marginalization of certain classes.

But both have largely been ok with everyone being exploited by feudal trade economics, bombing other nations to satisfy global political norms, and swindling developing nations out of their resources, while emotionally coddling elites.

It means something to not be outright hostile to the truly marginalized, but the Dems have not exactly been labors friend. And most people are laborers. They’ve failed the majority plenty.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#157

Post by duggan » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:32 PM UTC

yongjik wrote: post #154

forinti wrote: post #66

The greeks had two institutions we could use: ostracism and lottery. We should be able to vote on those we want out of politics and the most voted would have to seat it out. And a small portion of representatives should be chosen by lottery. Maybe 5% or 10%. These representatives, obviously, would not have to answer to their sponsors.

Imagine Google or Facebook hiring 5% of their developers by lottery. Take all applicants, no questions asked, pick randomly. I can't fathom why people think "managing a country" requires less skills than managing servers. The consequences of hiring someone unqualified is certainly not less severe.

I imagine in that scenario that Google and Facebook would get particularly good at resilience and security.

Once you've got enough people, 5% of them may as well have been hired by lottery, depending on what you're measuring. People get less productive, more productive, want to change the company, decide to steal things, etc.

I think it's interesting to think about.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#158

Post by collegecamp293 » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:34 PM UTC

kro92kfmrzz wrote: post #156

marricks wrote: post #42

I always hate the framing as “polarized”. There’s tons of things Democrats and Republicans agree on. Military spending goes up every year. Save for Dodd-Frank, deregulation has been common across presidencies for 30 years along with corporate tax cuts... The establishment gets things done, they really do, it’s just not things that help everyday people. I’m not sure how this would help that.

Basically they disagree on how to treat their fellow citizens. Democrats are against outright hostility and blatant marginalization of certain classes. But both have largely been ok with everyone being exploited by feudal trade economics, bombing other nations to satisfy global political norms, and swindling developing nations out of their resources, while emotionally coddling elites. It means something to not be out…

"Democrats are against outright hostility and blatant marginalization of certain classes."

There are tons of YouTube videos on college campuses that prove otherwise.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#159

Post by ThrustVectoring » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

mbostleman wrote: post #155

>>The purpose...is to determine “whether the intense preferences of the minority outweigh the weak preferences of the majority”>> Given this, apparently the problem is that strong minority preferences are being snuffed out by majority preferences? Of course, this is the inherent flaw in democracy. In the US we have two guards against that - the first is the Electoral College and the second is the Constitution. The fo…

There's another guard against it, which is the ability for congressional representatives to negotiate deals. They are not obligated to do whatever 50.01% of the population prefers on an issue by issue basis, but rather to do what they think will win elections. Issues that people care about more are more important for winning elections, so politicians can compromise on broadly-supported issues people care little about in order to work on niche issues with intense support.

In practice, this looks like things like pork-barrel infrastructure spending and farm subsidies. These sorts of things are pretty unpopular with most people, but they keep getting passed, and the above is why.

Re: A New Way of Voting That Makes Zealotry Expensive

#160

Post by ivanbakel » Fri, May 03, 2019, 5:37 PM UTC

mbostleman wrote: post #155

>>The purpose...is to determine “whether the intense preferences of the minority outweigh the weak preferences of the majority”>> Given this, apparently the problem is that strong minority preferences are being snuffed out by majority preferences? Of course, this is the inherent flaw in democracy. In the US we have two guards against that - the first is the Electoral College and the second is the Constitution. The fo…

>Given this, apparently the problem is that strong minority preferences are being snuffed out by majority preferences? Of course, this is the inherent flaw in democracy.

That's not the problem Quadratic Voting tries to solve at all. The increased cost of additional votes actually reduces the voting power of certain minority groups, such as one-issue voters. The system tries to fix the opposite - a strong minority preference winning a vote where it is not the first choice of the majority.