[pp.int.general] liquidfeedback myths? /was Re: LQFB: status quo in Germany // was: liquid feedback papers and/or data?

[carlo von lynX]

On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 06:08:57PM +0200, F?lix Robles wrote:
> No, the actual candidate might perfectly have nothing to do with it. For
> example the candidate might just want to lower the taxes on the rich
> because he really thinks that is the best for society... and then the rich
> people, independently, might buy the votes of the poor people just because
> that candidate's ideas benefit them.

That is an example that doesn't scale. It only makes sense to buy votes
of people that have a stronger influence on policy than mere citizen.
Like, members of a political party. Or even better, parliamentaries.
Both are under social scrutiny however, so it is more convenient for
them to do you a favour if no-one knows about it. Especially if they
know you will reward them if the proposal passes. If the proposal
passes it doesn't really matter who exactly made that happen - you
just give a large donation to all the political parties that are
likely to have made that possible. While the general public is
shocked that their parliament was capable of voting that way.

Now think that our party was at the government and that Google would
like us to support a certain law and that it was obvious that Google
would then make a substantial donation to our party. And think that
we have a participatory system by which our parliamentaries have to
vote the way we decided. Would you prefer the members of our party
to openly say no to bad politics or be enabled to secretly say yes?

> Oh, but it actually works that way. You should study the history of Spain
> (I am spanish) in the XIX century and you would see why now, for official
> government elections, we have secret vote and why those who count the votes
> are normal citizens elected randomly.

Yes of course, all modern democracies have secret vote when it comes
to electing people. Especially when the deciding body is not some
influential elite but the Sovereign population.

> And of course, it's a very different thing to want secret vote for
> representatives and for citizens.

Exactly.