At 01:02 AM 3/30/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 02:52:20 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>>That's correct. What I'm suggesting is that voting rights
>>immediately respond, but that deliberation rights float to some
>>degree. You've travelled to the capital, you rented an apartmen
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 02:52:20 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 01:14 AM 3/29/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>
>>The real topic here is whether new legislator terms start the
>>instant someone gets enough proxies filed, or seats change with
>>enough advance notice for those involved to make ne
At 01:14 AM 3/29/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>The real topic here is whether new legislator terms start the
>instant someone gets enough proxies filed, or seats change with
>enough advance notice for those involved to make needed adjustments.
That's correct. What I'm suggesting is that voting rig
Abd has started a related thread: Path to a Proxy Legislature
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 12:32:53 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 04:07 AM 3/28/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:32:01 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry. He referred to a specific time before the eff
At 04:07 AM 3/28/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:32:01 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>
>>Sorry. He referred to a specific time before the effectiveness of a
>>revocation of proxy. That establishes a minimum term of office.
>
>Not quite, assuming that is minimum time for a legi
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:32:01 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 01:10 AM 3/27/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>>>What Ketchum is doing is to elect a legislature by proxy, and
>>>apparently to maintain the variable voting power of proxies, but he
>>>would retain terms of office. Thus he loses a k
At 01:10 AM 3/27/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>What Ketchum is doing is to elect a legislature by proxy, and
>>apparently to maintain the variable voting power of proxies, but he
>>would retain terms of office. Thus he loses a key aspect of proxy
>>democracy, which is continuous representation.
>
At 12:49 AM 3/27/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>I count Abd's direct voting as torture.
Ketchum treats direct democracy as if I invented it.
He doesn't state who is tortured. Perhaps he's tortured because he
doesn't like to consider ideas that didn't come from him, I don't
know. He hasn't said. He
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:20:47 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 08:52 PM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:08:03 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>>
>>>What Ketchum has done is to connect floor rights with voting power,
>>>rigidly. But voting power, as I've mentioned,
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:01:11 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 08:50 PM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:23:10 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>>
>>>Proxy voting is not normal for legislatures.
>>>
>>
>>Hooray! I am proposing proxies as a method of electing a
>>leg
At 08:52 PM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:08:03 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>>What Ketchum has done is to connect floor rights with voting power,
>>rigidly. But voting power, as I've mentioned, properly comes from
>>the voters, not from the assembly, and participatio
At 08:50 PM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:23:10 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>>Proxy voting is not normal for legislatures.
>
>
>Hooray! I am proposing proxies as a method of electing a
>legislature, not as a means of torturing how they perform their tasks.
One might
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:08:03 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 01:51 AM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
> Responding to Abd with a clarification on time:
>
>
>>If a change in proxies means a legislator loses floor rights
>>tomorrow, tomorrow is when those changes affect his voting power.
>>
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:23:10 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 02:51 AM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
> if we imagine Trees by Proxy as proposed by Ketchum, and then we add to
> it the following provisions:
>
>>> (1) Voters may vote directly at any assembly by showing up and
>>> voting, te
At 02:51 AM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
if we imagine Trees by Proxy as proposed by Ketchum, and then we add
to it the following provisions:
>>(1) Voters may vote directly at any assembly by showing up and
>>voting, technical constraints permitting. This presence does not,
>>in itself, give
At 01:51 AM 3/26/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
Responding to Abd with a clarification on time:
>If a change in proxies means a legislator loses floor rights
>tomorrow, tomorrow is when those changes affect his voting power.
What Ketchum has done is to connect floor rights with voting power,
rigidly
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 00:18:00 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 05:43 PM 3/25/2007, Juho wrote:
...
>> (This
>>applies also to many other discussions on this mailing list on the
>>relative merits of different voting methods and discussions on "which
>>one is best".) To me it seems obvious tha
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 17:33:03 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 11:41 PM 3/24/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
> I accept Abd's suggestion to discard his words whenever they conflict
> with my goals.
>
And would discard less if he could recognize the goal of this thread:
>
>>TO OTHERS! I welcome
At 05:43 PM 3/25/2007, Juho wrote:
>I don't believe there would be one single method and
>formal procedures that would be best for all environments.
Right. It is not being proposed that FA/DP is for every
organizational type, merely that it is an interesting tool that could
rapidly transform soc
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 16:32:28 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> On the right to vote in high assemblies:
>
> At 03:31 PM 3/24/2007, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
I have to object to Abd's reference here to "delegable proxy assemblies".
While I use proxies in electing legislators, the context is
In the discussion of use of proxies for FAs and more formal and
decision making legislative and other processes support the idea of
making clear definitions and separating different areas of discussion
as needed. I don't believe there would be one single method and
formal procedures that wo
At 11:41 PM 3/24/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
I accept Abd's suggestion to discard his words whenever they conflict
with my goals.
>TO OTHERS! I welcome attempts at contributing toward using proxies
>to improve quality of legislatures.
And I'll note for others that while legislative proxy voting
On the right to vote in high assemblies:
At 03:31 PM 3/24/2007, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>What I've assumed is the minimum necessary restriction to
>allow scalability. The right to vote does not impact scalability,
>under most conditions. The right to deliberate does. So I assume that
>delegable
On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 15:31:45 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> It should be understood that my writing is often quite general. When
> I propose Delegable Proxy, for example, I am referring to the most
> generic implementation, though I may sometimes assume certain rules.
> Mr. Ketchum seems t
It should be understood that my writing is often quite general. When
I propose Delegable Proxy, for example, I am referring to the most
generic implementation, though I may sometimes assume certain rules.
Mr. Ketchum seems to treat DP as if the rules were fixed and quite
particularly fixed.
At
Anyone interested in understanding what I am offering here had best ignore
anything Abd offers here:
He offers Free Associations, Asset voting, and Delegable Proxy. He
may have something of value, but I also claim value for my thoughts.
I offer proxies as a way of populating a legisl
At 09:36 PM 3/23/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>Seeing Free Associations and Trees by Proxy as different concepts:
> Abd's Free Associations use proxies to create Free Associations,
>which decide for themselves what they are and do.
> My Trees by Proxy use proxies to elect legislatures, whi
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 15:18:14 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 03:47 AM 3/21/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
This one line of Abd's does not fit, for what follows is my words as
quoted by him.
>>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 23:52:45 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Back to my previous post:
>>Voters in a
At 03:47 AM 3/21/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 23:52:45 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>Voters in a village give proxies to elders in their
>village. Village elders give proxies to town trustees in their town.
>
>While holding one effective voter proxy directly makes one an eld
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 23:52:45 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 06:01 AM 3/20/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>While our thoughts on proxy are similar, I see what I am trying as
>>being far from Free Association.
>
>
> Think about it a while, you might come around :-)
>
Not ye
At 06:01 AM 3/20/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>Thanks.
>
>While our thoughts on proxy are similar, I see what I am trying as
>being far from Free Association.
Think about it a while, you might come around :-)
I originally developed delegable proxy having governmental structure
in mind. However
Thanks.
While our thoughts on proxy are similar, I see what I am trying as being
far from Free Association.
DWK
On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 01:39:59 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 03:32 PM 3/18/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>
>>Abd has good ideas under the labels Assets and Delegable Proxy, but the
At 03:32 PM 3/18/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>Abd has good ideas under the labels Assets and Delegable Proxy, but they
>are buried in so many books of words that extracting useful value is
>difficult.
Hey, there is a quick solution: don't understand something, ask.
Better, ask on the wiki. The FAQ
On Sun, 18 Mar 2007 22:47:15 +0200 Juho wrote:
>> This is a different way to assign legislative power - no
>>elections. Still, this could be implemented first at village, or
>>village+town levels, without involving higher levels of government
>>until/unless it was accepted.
>
>
>>
> This is a different way to assign legislative power - no
> elections. Still, this could be implemented first at village, or
> village+town levels, without involving higher levels of government
> until/unless it was accepted.
> That a proxy becoming effective is heard instantly a
35 matches
Mail list logo
