[EM] Continuous elections and their interplay with power structures

[Juho]

Ok, in a stable system with well established connections between  
"nodes" that stability will increase. I was concerned about the  
ability of individuals to move large masses of votes (larger than  
what they got directly in the election) by just their own individual  
decision. Maybe the misuse of such power (e.g. changing one's opinion  
just before an important election) should be eliminated somehow.

Juho


On Aug 21, 2008, at 15:06 , Michael Allan wrote:

> Juho wrote:
>> There is a difference between methods where only voters can modify  
>> their
>> votes at any time and methods where the candidate that got some  
>> votes can
>> redirect these votes. The latter case may cause larger and faster  
>> changes.
>> And such changes may lead to reactions also among those voters  
>> that gave
>> their vote to this person (if the voters do not like the change).  
>> These
>> properties may mean higher instability.
>
> I argue the opposite.  My guess is that, in mid-term:
>
>   a) the tree structure (pattern of vote flow) will be highly stable
>
>   b) it will be especially stable if the leaf voters are disconnected
>      (but I do not advocate that)
>
> (a) It will be stable because the tree will not only model opinion,
> which can easily shift, but also a structure of power and lines of
> communication, which cannot.  In practice, power is going to be
> delegated from the center (root) to the periphery (leafward) of the
> tree, following the lines of voting, and the rules of patronage.  And
> communication channels will form along those same lines.  Once this
> structure crystallizes, vote shifts be detrimental to the delegates at
> all levels, and to most of the leaf voters too.  The effect of a vote
> shift will be to unplug oneself from the power structure.
>
> (b) There may be some bleeding of votes at the very edges.  Voters who
> aren't really plugged in, because they don't communicate much with
> their local delegates will have nothing to lose by shifting their
> votes around.  As long as they aren't too numerous, these shift voters
> will perform a useful function as an early warning system (canaries in
> the coal mine).
>
> The problem (as I see it) is the opposite.  The problem is to
> understand roughly how this stability is going to break down (or not)
> on approaching the end of a term, and the possibility of a formal
> power shift.
>
> -- 
> Michael Allan
>
> Toronto, 647-436-4521
> http://zelea.com/
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for  
> list info


		
___________________________________________________________ 
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com