At 01:56 AM 3/23/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote: >I suggest you look at Trees by Proxy as a better base for your thoughts. > >It provides for electing legislatures, such as boards of trustees or >elders, via continuous elections (proxies). > >Unlike Free Associations, these have traditional powers and responsibilities.
First of all, I'm not sure what "Trees by Proxy" means. Is there a description somewhere? I've been describing Delegable Proxy, which certainly sounds like "Trees by Proxy." Mr. Ketchum doesn't seem to understand that "my thoughts" are deeply involved in both the FA and DP concepts, and what I have to present which is new is the combination. I don't *want* "traditional powers and responsibilities," they are precisely part of the problem. I'm not going to go through a detailed explanation, but "traditional powers and responsibilities" are appropriate, largely, for control structures, not for those which maximize intelligence. So that Mr. Ketchum suggests that "Trees by Proxy" would provide a better base for my thoughts, and that it "provides for electing legislatures," shows principally that he has not understood what I'm suggesting, not merely that he disagrees with it. Sure, Delegable Proxy can be used for elections and for many other things. BeyondPolitics.org is interested in this, as we are interested in all applications of Delegable Proxy and similar technologies. But we have a very specific application in mind as an organizational initiative, it is an application of DP that can start *today*. It needs no changes in law. Nor does it take collecting large sums of money, what is involved financially is literally pocket change. Nor does it take large numbers of people; at this point every person who becomes involved furthers the cause significantly. And this would include people who participate merely to criticize. >I said nothing of parties, but said nothing against parties. I suspect >they would have less power than with traditional elections. Sure. Mr. Ketchum should understand by now that not all I write is a specific response to something specifically raised by someone else. It is, rather, what occurs to me *in relation* to what someone has written. Unless, of course, I start the thread. >The actual "electing" of someone wishing to be a legislator has little >formality. The attracting of enough proxies to make one a legislator with >muscle could get involved. Consider what would happen in an FA/DP organization. A proxy attracts clients. We think that proxies in FA/DP organizations will generally have not a large number of direct clients. But suppose this proxy impresses those who are themselves broadly trusted. The proxy could end up being at the center of a natural caucus that contains significant numbers of members. The proxy would make an ideal candidate for office, or for nominating someone for office. The body of supporters is already created. Even if the FA/DP organization is not a directly political one! ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info