[MG] Introducing PdI (Partido de Internet)
david.ruescas at partidodeinternet.es
Wed Jun 2 15:01:43 EDT 2010
On 2 June 2010 20:50, Ed Pastore <epastore at metagovernment.org> wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2010, at 2:00 PM, David Ruescas wrote:
> Besides the experts to which Ive talked in person, that belong to the
>> research group that I have linked to, you can take time to survey attempts
>> at e-voting around the world, where experts (researchers in the matter) have
>> tried to create voting system prototypes, all of them including privacy, eg
>> Cybervote, SERVE, Sensus, Evox, GNU Free (in fact, Ive actually talked to
>> Jason Kitcat) Scytl Pnyx.. I have yet to find an equivalent that does not
>> include privacy..
> I have looked up most of those, and from what I can tell all of the ones I
> could find are heavily bent toward running elections. Again, it is crucial
> to distinguish between elections, referenda, and an open ecosystem of
> collaborative policy-making. The first two are the only things anyone has
> really tried.
Everything I have said in this thread refers to elections/referenda, which
if you remember, is the target of the channel that PdI aims to create. PdI
does not intend, at the moment, to propose/elaborate policy, although this
may be added as an essential element in later stages. The first step, and
priority, is to establish a voting channel, which is very ambitious already.
> The last one is the focus of this group. When individuals are asked to
> create policy, there are very good reasons for them to put their reputation
> on the line.
> I have no objection to systems which can support privacy (and David, I laud
> your tenacity in fielding criticism from so many fronts). However, I am
> strongly leaning toward emphasizing public voting... much more so than I was
> when this thread started.
Our system requires public voting for those persons/institutions/entities
that label themselves as representatives, ie recipients of delegated votes
(in a liquid democracy context) so that voters can observe their voting
behaviour and act accordingly.
> I think it may be nice to have the capacity to support both anonymous and
> public systems, but in the end public is the goal (I think we all agree on
> that so some extent), so I'd like to see it get into peoples' minds sooner
> rather than later.
> Start : a mailing list of the Metagovernment project
> Post to the list: Start at metagovernment.org
> Manage subscription:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Start