Hi Abd, I'm glad to see that you are continuing to develop your ideas about FA/DP.
Unfortunately, I still find these ideas very abstract. I'm having a hard time visualizing how they might work in practice. Maybe I should just throw out a bunch of questions... (And maybe you should answer them on your beyondpolitics.org wiki, to save yourself some time and to encourage people to participate in the wiki :-) About FAs: What sorts of organizations would be be well served by the FA model? Are there some sorts of organizations that should NOT use the FA model? Does it make sense for an FA to include people from opposite or widely differing viewpoints on an issue of major concern to the FA? For example, would it make sense to have an FA with pro-choice and pro-life people in it, to discuss reproductive issues? What could such an association accomplish? Would it make sense to have a Voting Methods FA, with some people supporting Condorcet, some supporting Approval, some supporting Range, some supporting IRV? Would it make sense for Plurality advocates to participate in the FA as well? Or does it make more sense to have one FA per voting method? Does it make sense to have an FA that concerns itself with a multitude of issues, such as political parties and some church groups do? Would it make sense for, say, a state political party to organize itself as an FA? Would the FA replace the existing party organization, or would it supplement it? What would be the benefits (and drawbacks) of replacing or supplementing a political party organization with an FA? You (Abd) seem to promote the idea that the FA is just for discussion, and that political action should be undertaken by "caucuses" that are apparently separate entities from the FA. Isn't that somewhat awkward, especially if most of the FA is in agreement about the action to be taken? Can the caucuses use the same communication channels as the FA? Does it make sense for the FA to have no power at all? For example, it should have the power to govern itself, set the rules for conducting meetings, etc., right? Abd: > And I really want to encourage anyone who cares to join with me. > BeyondPolitics.org, in its conception, is itself an FA/DP... What would the BP organization _do_? Would it just be a discussion group, about how to convert this or that organization to FA/DP? What is the benefit of having the BP organization, as separate from EM? Would there ever be enough members and volume of discussion that the proxy or delegable proxy mechanisms would be used? About DP: In political or government organizations that deal with many different issues, wouldn't it make more sense for people to have multiple proxies to represent them on different issues? For example, I might have a hard time finding one proxy who would represent my views on all the issues that concern me. I would like to have one proxy who is an expert in voting methods and supports my favorite method to represent me regarding voting reform; I'd like another person who specializes in drug war issues and supports my views to represent me regarding drug war issues. And so on. For communication from the top down, it seems to me that existing newsletter mechanisms work reasonably well. For example, I get newsletters from various legislators and PACs that tell me about upcoming and past legislation, and how those legislators voted or intend to vote. In a DP organization, those communications need to get passed down in a timely manner, so people can discuss items of disagreement with their immediate proxies, or switch proxies if they wish. How does one become a proxy? How does one rise in the hierarchy of proxies? Cheers, - Jan ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
