Re: Lemming City
Mark parashakti108 at yahoo.com
Tue, 12 Apr 2005 17:45:14 -0000
>-M: What is wrong with a minority imposing its will if the minority
>RE: well, lots of people could decide not to cooperate (as in the
eastblock), or even get organised and/or resort to violence. There
-M: If things get that bad its because the system isn't percieved as
being legitimate. Public perception would have to be monitored if SD2
were to be implimented at a political level.
> >D: Efficiency is not always the best path. As Ronaldo already
pointed out, things were "efficient" (decisions were reached quickly)
under Hitler and Mussolini.
> -M: We are comparing his system with mine.
>RE: as far as hindering bushmonkeys is concerned
-M: SD2 wouldn't give a Bushmonkey a chance.
>-M: My system is more efficient and more legitimate.
>RE: maybe, but as long as there are no millions of people (and that
would include joe sixpack, ideally) understands why, it hasn't got a
-M: SD2 is very simple. Votes are processed with PageRank instead of
*in-degree*(vote-counting). The resulting structures are much simpler
than with the current system.
> >D: The empty seats philosophy basically states that efficiency is
only desired if backed by a reasonable majority, but otherwise not.
That's the core argument of the idea.
> -M: Majority? When is the populist trip going to stop?
>RE: When people stop buying it. As long as people are depraved from
sleep, education and solid information, they will welcome
-M: Populism doesn't work, yet people cling to it.
>RE: Writing in such a way that also people who don't know your
jargon understand is quite a challenge, but I hope you (we?) will
manage to do so groetjes, Ronaldo
-M: The *jargon* shows that SD2 is connected to fields of study. I
have explained all of my *jargon*.
> --ro-esp wrote:
> >RE: Those who voted for Bush were only a 25% minority. The problem
> is that no one cares about the 50% that didn't vote. What is needed
> is a voting-system in which everyone also has the "none-of-those-
> -M: The main people who don't care about the 50% non-voter's votes
> are the non-voters themselves.
>RE: What other options were there ? Would Kerry have been a major
blessing ? Were there others ?
-M: Kerry would have been better than the Bushmonkey. I think that
the main problem here is the institutional support that Bush has.
>RE: [what I read suggests a trustedness-contest, the problem with
that seems to me that you don't trust people you don't know. Thus,
those with the best campaign would still have an advantage over those
who are trustworthy, but not that known}
-M: No. Study the PageRank algorithm. PageRank would create a peer-
review environment where the support of people who know someone would
largely be needed for someone to rise.
>-M:...more accountable and more(yes)representive than your system.
Since your system is populistic, at least 49% are guaranteed to be
marginalized, and there is no mechanism to keep the 51% accountable
to the reasoned arguements of the 49%.
>RE: you see things rather gloomy.... I'm not saying my voting-system
is perfect, or better or worse than your sd-2. I'm just saying it
would be a simple and effective way to prevent Bush-es from coming to
power, and marginalising even majorities.
-M: Its still populistic. Lets look for the best system.
>-M: Lemming City.
>RE: what do you mean by that ? groetjes, Ronaldo
-M: I call the majority "lemmings" which are the rodents that commit
suicide in mass. I refer to any populistic system as "Lemming City".
If the masses were left to their own devices, they would eagerly
destroy civilization as evidenced by French Revolution and similar
mindsets that exist today.
>RE: hi there Just been to the website the Q&A file should be
reworked, because it's text is a few feet wider than my screen...the
students for SD-2-file is easier to read, though some letters and
words are missing. groetjes, Ronaldo
-M: I did have it formatted for easier reading, but then it was hard
to copy and paste.
-Mark, Seattle WA USA
- From: "denis bider" <email@example.com>