Democratic symmetry

[Rob Lanphier]

On Tue, 7 Mar 2000 DEMOREP1 at aol.com wrote:
> Since majority (i.e. Democracy) > minority (i.e. monarchy/ oligarchy), there 
> is a math asymmetry (and should/must be in election methods).

That's a very good point.  "Majority rule" is by it's very nature
asymmetrical; it's probably folly to try to impose symmetry.

An anecdote famous in tech circles illustrates the danger of "symmetry" in
group consensus.  The International Telecommunications Union (formerly
known as CCITT) was responsible for the standardization of ATM, a
networking standard that was supposed to become *the* standard for
networking.  They were responsible for coming up with a standard "cell"
size for all network traffic.

Accounts vary, but the gist is that many representatives from Europe and
Japan wanted a 32 byte cell size, and the U.S. contingent wanted a 64 byte
cell.  Both had good reasons for what they wanted, but it created a
deadlock that lasted for years, because they had a voting mechanism that
required near unanimity, from what I understand.  Finally, out of
exhaustion, they settled on 48 bytes. 

48 bytes was a nice symmetrical solution.  However, it was also a really
dumb compromise.  The arguments against 32 byte cells, and the arguments
against 64 byte cells *both* apply very well in arguing against 48 byte
cells.  If you are interested in the details, they can be found in the
Cell-relay FAQ, at:
http://cell-relay.indiana.edu/cell-relay/FAQ/ATM-FAQ/d/d7.htm#D7

Rob
(who fully realizes this anecdote has almost nothing to do with Borda)

Rob Lanphier
robla at eskimo.com
http://www.eskimo.com/~robla