At 06:23 PM 5/16/2006, Antonio Oneala wrote: > Asset voting is a way to quickly aggregate the preference of > the teams, but it does have flaws. Because you are assigning your > vote to someone who is not yourself, they will often vote differently.
That characteristic of Asset Voting is not necessarily a flaw. On the average, candidates (who are functioning like electors under Asset Voting, as well as being candidates), will know the other candidates much better than I. Unless I'm a candidate! Now, if better information has any effect on voter behavior, we can predict that the votes will be different. That's the good news, not the bad news! >And this coming from a furtherment of democracy activist... I >actually sometimes have little faith in the system, as all the >people seem to want to do is use it to benefit themselves at the >expense of others. Yet, many more democracies are much freer than >than the other systems that have been proposed, so I guess there's >little alternative. There is an alternative. Long story. For starters, http://beyondpolitics.org/wiki http://metaparty.beyondpolitics.org These are initiatives that start here and there is a plan that takes them there. One step at a time. The first steps are for people to simply understand the possibilities. Believe me, that is quite hard enough. But it will happen, I'm quite sure, unless some truly major catastrophe makes democracy impossible before the change has time to set in. Let me put it this way. If it does not happen, it will be because something better came along. And one of the characteristics of this plan is that it sets up a system which is structurally open to new ideas, *without* being unstable. ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
