A voter can appoint a proxy to act for them - no secrecy here. While the voter can cancel the proxy instantly, this has to be discouraged, perhaps by a delay before a replacement proxy can be authorized.
Any proxy, like the above voters, can appoint a proxy to hold all their power.
Proxies can also be elected. If a voter participates in an election in which they could elect a proxy, secrecy prohibits their also appointing proxies. Elected proxies are elected to a fixed term, as for PR, but have the same power (based on the count of votes that elected them) to appoint proxies as above.
How many voters a proxy is acting for affects them as follows:
Weighted votes - a proxy acting for 2N voters has exactly twice the voting power of a proxy acting for N voters. I get nervous about doing meetings in phone booths. so perhaps there should be a limit, such as 1/3 of total body power. Even a voter acting only as own proxy gets to vote, but this may be painful enough to encourage them to appoint proxies.
Acting as legislator - debating, etc. Have to hold some minimum to have this power.
Getting paid - done per proxies held, except no pay if unreasonably few, and do not get paid beyond what a reasonable maximum would earn.
BTW - a couple minor parties could combine their proxies to get up to the debating minimum - there REALLY HAS to be a limit on how many debating members exist in a body.
Also, someone wrote of a circular string of proxy authorizations - simply has to be prevented.
I read of DD - strange from view of what I propose.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
Dave Ketchum 108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY 13827-1708 607-687-5026
Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
If you want peace, work for justice.---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
