[Election-Methods] Proposing a Delegable Proxy poll: best

[Jan Kok]

On 8/3/07, raphfrk at netscape.net <raphfrk at netscape.net> wrote:
>  > From: AllAbout Voting <AllAboutVoting at gmail.com>
>  > >[Jan Kok] Let's try a DP poll!
>  > >...
>  > >This is the proposed poll topic and title:
>  > >*** What is the best place to host the US-Iraq Conflict forum?
>  > Jan,
>  >
>  > Can you give us more information about what features the forum will need?
>
>  Also, is the objective to have a DP forum or is it to find a
>  reasonable forum?  As you say, there are lots of places such forums
>  occur.

The ultimate goal is to solve the world's problems.

I think better voting methods can help, by allowing more candidates to
run for office (more competition -> better choices available), by
allowing voters to vote more honestly, giving better information about
their opinions about the candidates, and by using that information to
pick the candidate(s) with the best overall utility to society.

But representative democracy - even with proportional representation -
is still a rather primitive mechanism for organizing society. Instead
of one king holding all the power and answerable to no one, we have
legislatures with on the order of 100 lords answerable (theoretically)
to the people who elected them. How second millennium!

Surely there are better ways to organize society. And while we're at
it, perhaps we should recognize individuals' rights to _not_ be
"organized" or controlled, but to be left alone if they want.

FA/DP might be such a way. They are designed to keep the power in the
hands of the individual members. Proxies have so special power,
because their votes on behalf of their constituents can always be
overridden by their constituents. FAs have no special power distinct
from the power of their members, because they hold no assets and they
are neutral on all controversial issues. Nevertheless, FA/DPs link
their members in a communication network, which can lead to powerful
action under the right conditions. If some member expresses an idea
that resonates with a large majority of the members (and DP polls
would confirm that widespread agreement), then the members who agree
can act in concert, to send donations to some cause, to bombard
congress with messages calling for some particular action, to vote for
some candidate, etc.

>  One issue all forums face is that alot of people tend to talk to
>  those that agree with them.  The trick is get people from both
>  sides participating.

Right. You can see why it is important to have people representing all
sides of an issue participating in an FA/DP. Suppose we had 50 people
in the Range Voting FA, all of them RV and AV fans. We might agree to
push for AV in Colorado in 2008. A DP poll might show unanimous
agreement among us. So what? The reality is, the FairVote people may
oppose us. So should we try to gather more people and funds and try to
overwhelm the FairVote people? Or should we talk to them, try to
convince them that it is in their own best interest to let us us try
AV someplace like Colorado? I think the latter approach is more likely
to lead to a more satisfactory solution for everyone. If FairVote had
representatives in the Range Voting FA, and talking to us regularly,
we would understand each other better, and could perhaps work together
toward our common goals. (Anthony Lorenzo is a member of the Florida
IRV organization, and is a member of the RangeVoting yahoo group. This
is a step in the right direction.)

Anyway, ARE THERE any forums where people on different sides of the
Iraq war issue are talking with each other and trying to come up with
a broadly satisfactory solution? I would like to know of any. Perhaps
FA/DP would help them. For example, it is likely a commonplace
occurrence: that new people join such a forum, get discouraged with
the apparent lack of progress, and then just leave without ever saying
a word. If new members are encouraged to find a proxy, then the member
may leave, but there is still a tiny thread connecting him or her to
the forum: the member would remain listed in the proxy assignments
database (unless the member asked to be removed), and the proxy would
have contact information. If a breakthrough occurs - someone makes a
proposal that is widely accepted according to DP polling - then
proxies can get in touch with inactive members and encourage them to
join in the proposed action.

I _am_ willing to try to sell FA/DP to some existing groups. But, so
far, my track record for selling FA/DP to existing groups has been
poor. Hence my interest in starting a new group and using FA/DP from
the beginning.

>  > In particular, does it itself need to support DP polls?
>  > (If yes, then I am not aware of any site that is suitable.  I don't
>  > share Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's view that the idea is central and the
>  > tools don't matter.  Having a site with good DP tools will help the
>  > idea function and propagate!!)
>
>  I totally agree.  Proxy expansion is alot of work to be done manually.
>  I was thinking about a software implementation, and even that would
>  put alot of load on the server.

Huh?! The compute effort to count the votes is linear (actually,
NlogN) with the number of members, is it not? With an intelligent
implementation, voting and looking at vote results should not increase
server load significantly above just serving web pages to all those
members.

>  This means that assuming that it isn't
>  an issue isn't reasonable.  People will want to be able to look at a poll
>  and just see the expansion numbers, they won't want to have to go
>  through the list and manually expand the proxies.
>
>  There would be 2 steps
>  1) expand proxy lists -> same for everyone
>  2) apply sock puppet removal weightings -> potentially different for each
> user

Might have to worry about sock puppets if we get hundreds or thousands
of members in an FA/DP. What a wonderful problem to have! :-) Bring it
on! :-)

>
>  When a proxy votes, it would require recalculation of the entire poll
>  for all users of the forum.  If there is some common way of telling who
>  is and is not a sock puppet, then the 2nd step can be removed.
>  However, that requires a central authority.  Alternatively, each
>  forum could have its own approved list.  To be designated "not
>  a sock puppet" would require approval along the proxy chain.

Clearly, creating sock puppets to manipulate poll results is a
dishonest and anti-social act. If the forum has the culture of honest
dealing with each other, sock puppets won't be condoned by the great
majority of members. For example, as an RV advocate, do I want RVFA
poll results for some proposal of mine to show more support than
actually exists? Hell, no!! I could go charging off to implement the
proposal, and then fail for lack of real support.

As an FA/DP gets large, there will likely be a small fraction of
members who attempt to manipulate the polls. I think that can be kept
under control by having a "verified" flag in the Proxy Assignments
database. A proxy would set that flag when he has verified to his own
satisfaction that his client is "real". For example, he could call his
client. If a proxy was found to have "verified" a sock puppet, he
would have some explaining to do, could lose credibility, suffer
humiliation, etc. Other clients of the proxy would be scrutinized and
independently verified, and the proxy's peers might also fall under
suspicion.

>
>  On the same lines (keep user effort to a minimum), I am not so sure
>  recommending moving the discussion to the RV list is a great idea.
>  The problem is that everyone on this list would have to register
>  on the RV list.  This would only take a few mins, but it is an
>  annoyance that most couldn't be bothered with.
>
>  NOTE: you can send messages to both lists by including
>
>  RangeVoting at yahoogroups.com
>
>  in the header.  This would allow people participate in the discussions
>  even if they don't vote.

Sure, the discussion can continue in both lists. If you want to vote
directly in a RVFA DP poll, you will need to become a member of the RV
yahoo group. On the other hand, you could ask someone you generally
agree with who is already a member of the RV group to be your proxy
and vote for you. That person would have to record that proxy
assignment in the proxy assignment table, in order to properly vote
for you.
>
>  OTOH, this list is now closed to the public, you have to subscribe to
>  see the archives.
>
>  The main point that Abd makes is that a FA system must at its root
>  allow people to setup alternative forums.  This provides a safety
>  value for concentrations of power.
>
>  I was thinking about how to do it with software.  Vbulletin forum
>  software is designed to allow extensions.  A plugin is written
>  that overrides default operation of the forum.  Perhaps a DP plugin
>  could be created.

Are you proposing a Vbulletin forum as one of the choices to list in
the DP poll? Do I hear a second?

(I don't like the passive voice, above. "A plugin is written..."
"Perhaps a DP plugin could be created" Will someone volunteer to do
that? I'm looking for a place to host the forum that I can use
immediately, as soon as I can recruit some people to join the forum.
If Vbulletin has spreadsheets available, or even plain document pages,
like Google documents or wiki pages, that would be adequate to start
with.)

>
>  Also, some kind of simple (computer readable) standard could be
>  created.  A person could create an identity by storing an XML file
>  on a web server somewhere.
>
>  It would list the person's proxies, the person's clients and any
>  other meta data that would be useful.
>
>  When they would register with a DP enabled forum, they would provide
>  a link to their XML page (or the server could host it if they wish).
>
>  This does have an issue that it creates a single point of failure.
>  If the person loses control of their XML page, they lose their
>  identity.  Perhaps people would be encouraged to have at least 3
>  XML pages.  All 3 would be (normally) identical, but if one was lost
>  or compromised, then 2 of the 3 would count as the person.  Perhaps,
>  something like the DHCP lease could be implemented.

If someone wants to work on that, great. Let me know when it works,
and I'll be glad to try it out.

I think my first few wishes for technology beyond what we have today are:

1. A simple user interface that allows members to record and change
their proxy/client relationships. And makes it easy to volunteer to be
a proxy.

2. A tool that allows brand new members to browse a list of proxies
that are accepting new clients, and helps the member choose a proxy.
Ideally that would be integrated with the new member registration
process. When a member chooses a proxy, the proxy would be
automatically notified.

These two are intended to minimize the burden on new members to get
them hooked into the proxy network.

3. A tool to count and expand the votes in DP polls. This is on my
wish list, not because I think it's really necessary right now, but
because it is kind of "whizzy"; it is something DP promoters could
show off; it might attract people just due to its novelty ("What is a
Delegable Proxy poll?") and it's ability to show the results of DP
polls "in real time". And I think a DP poll counter would be a fun
programming project. I've been sorely tempted to do it myself :-)

Cheers,
- Jan