[EM] Free Associations (was: Trees and single-winner methods)

Dave Ketchum davek at clarityconnect.com
Fri Mar 23 12:00:53 PDT 2007

On Fri, 23 Mar 2007 11:23:05 -0400 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 01:56 AM 3/23/2007, Dave Ketchum wrote:
>> I suggest you look at Trees by Proxy as a better base for your thoughts.
>> It provides for electing legislatures, such as boards of trustees or
>> elders, via continuous elections (proxies).
>> Unlike Free Associations, these have traditional powers and 
>> responsibilities.
> First of all, I'm not sure what "Trees by Proxy" means. Is there a 
> description somewhere? I've been describing Delegable Proxy, which 
> certainly sounds like "Trees by Proxy."

"Trees by Proxy" is a thread I started March 18 in response to a post by 
Juho.  While he was responding to one of your posts, it seemed clear to me 
that he wanted something DIFFERENT FROM Free Association.  Further, he 
expressed enough thought that I could and did start a thread based on that 
      I get proxies the same place you got them.  The usage being a bit 
different, I thought of creating a new name because of the differences - 
but gave up on that thought.

     Holders of THE ABOVE proxies are members of legislatures with 

traditional powers and responsibilities.

You have posted in that thread - apparently not noticing what the topic 
was, and thus not fitting too well.

> Mr. Ketchum doesn't seem to understand that "my thoughts" are deeply 
> involved in both the FA and DP concepts, and what I have to present 
> which is new is the combination. I don't *want* "traditional powers and 
> responsibilities," they are precisely part of the problem. I'm not going 
> to go through a detailed explanation, but "traditional powers and 
> responsibilities" are appropriate, largely, for control structures, not 
> for those which maximize intelligence.
> So that Mr. Ketchum suggests that "Trees by Proxy" would provide a 
> better base for my thoughts, and that it "provides for electing 
> legislatures," shows principally that he has not understood what I'm 
> suggesting, not merely that he disagrees with it.

I said nothing like that.  If you go back and look more carefully, you 
will see that I was responding to Juho.


> Sure, Delegable Proxy can be used for elections and for many other 
> things. BeyondPolitics.org is interested in this, as we are interested 
> in all applications of Delegable Proxy and similar technologies. But we 
> have a very specific application in mind as an organizational 
> initiative, it is an application of DP that can start *today*. It needs 
> no changes in law. Nor does it take collecting large sums of money, what 
> is involved financially is literally pocket change. Nor does it take 
> large numbers of people; at this point every person who becomes involved 
> furthers the cause significantly. And this would include people who 
> participate merely to criticize.
>> I said nothing of parties, but said nothing against parties.  I suspect
>> they would have less power than with traditional elections.
> Sure. Mr. Ketchum should understand by now that not all I write is a 
> specific response to something specifically raised by someone else. It 
> is, rather, what occurs to me *in relation* to what someone has written. 
> Unless, of course, I start the thread.
>> The actual "electing" of someone wishing to be a legislator has little
>> formality.  The attracting of enough proxies to make one a legislator with
>> muscle could get involved.
> Consider what would happen in an FA/DP organization. A proxy attracts 
> clients. We think that proxies in FA/DP organizations will generally 
> have not a large number of direct clients. But suppose this proxy 
> impresses those who are themselves broadly trusted. The proxy could end 
> up being at the center of a natural caucus that contains significant 
> numbers of members. The proxy would make an ideal candidate for office, 
> or for nominating someone for office. The body of supporters is already 
> created.
> Even if the FA/DP organization is not a directly political one!

  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list