Mr. Saari wrote:
In a rated vote (where a distinct "opinion" is expressed for every
possibility), it is possible to conduct the decision process with a method
where each alternative is proposed and voted on independently. (Assume this
is done in parallel, meaning that a variety of proposals/alternatives can be
pending simultaneously.) This means that new alternatives can be conceived
and proposed ad hoc by the members on an as-needed basis. This method is non-
dictatorial because all new alternatives can appear whenever desired by any
given member (subject to any other existing rules regarding new proposals -
assume that such rules apply equally to all members).
In contrast, in a ranked vote ( where alternatives are ordered first, second,
third, etc.) it is necessary to compile a "final list of alternatives" before
any voting can occur. The creation and presentation of the "final list" must
necessarily be performed by a subcommittee duly authorized to perform this
task. I am unaware of any method involving ranked voting which does not also
necessarily involve the dictatorial pre-step of creating the "final list" (and
establishing an "official polling date/time"). Perhaps there is a method I am
not aware of?
D- With a world human population of around 5.5 billion, is Mr. Saari
suggesting that every indivdual have a proposal on any issue ? Is having a
minimal support requirement for any issue (i.e. some X percentage of the
membership) before it goes on the ballot (or agenda) being dictatorial ?
The reality currently is that in all current public legislative bodies the
"leader" of the body or a small oligarchy of the body determines what will be
voted upon. I repeat my suggested remedy - the highest percentage of all of
the members of the body who want a a vote on an issue should determine the
order of voting on issues (assuming the body is elected by the people using an
accurate proportional representation election method).
