[pp.int.general] 'Liquid Democrazy': Pirate Party Sinks amid Chaos and Bickering
streetdogg at gmx.net
Sun Feb 24 19:07:18 CET 2013
Am 24.02.2013 11:46, schrieb Zbigniew Łukasiak:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Nicolás Reynolds <fauno at kiwwwi.com.ar> wrote:
>> why is liquid feedback nonbinding? this has always been a big wtf for
>> me... (also the concept of liquid democracy :P)
> I don't know German law - but in some cases the law does state how the
> decisions are made.
There is no easy and obvious way. There are probably posibilities to
"hack" the law, but nobody really knows if it would stand before courts.
Also there are data protection laws that collide with security needs.
> "Time and again, a majority of the party's members express support
> online for a particular idea, only to scrap it at the party's next
> real-world meeting."
> Why that happens? Does that mean that different people vote in LF?
> People change their minds?
Only a more or less small subset of the party members use the system to
express their opinions. Basically the party is divided in fans of the
system and those who oppose it. The results in the system are obviously
dominated by the fans. The delegation system concentrates the power to
even less people, who usually have the biggest influence on the results.
On the actual assemblies members with all different backgrounds come
together, which leads to different results. They unfortunately are
influenced by the place of the assembly to a certain extend, but the
distorting effects in LQFB because of different intensity of usage and
different acceptance of the delegation feature are much, much bigger.
More information about the pp.international.general