[EM] Delegable proxy/cascade and killer apps

[Michael Allan]

> >  I imagine the biggest thing on offer (for N = 0 to 9) is the distant
> >  promise of what it's designed to do.  We have to express that promise,
> >  and hold it out as worth reaching for (which it is!).
 
Raph Frank wote:
> It has potential as an organising system.  However, with only 10
> people, it might be easier to just discuss the issue directly.

Yes, if Nmax (population size) is low, then a voting medium is not
needed.  The purpose of the medium is support the growth of the
discussion in the population as a whole.  By providing structural
"handholds" for agreement, it enables the discussion to climb in scale
- like a rose bush on a garden trellis.

> I wonder if targetting a specific problem might help.  Take something
> like a homeowner's association.  That is large enough that not
> everyone bothers to get involved and small enough as a test system.
> 
> Some have complained that the current system is not very effective and
> somewhat undemocratic.  Your system could help people with very little
> time to participate.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeowners_association
> 
> There would probably be resistance to setting it up by existing directors.

I'm not too familiar with private associations.  My own test server is
public, but that doesn't preclude other admins from setting up
parallel servers for private associations.  If anyone wants to use
Votorola for that purpose, the code is free.  (And I can probably help
on the technical side.)

There's a small side even to a big city server.  It doesn't mean just
big elections like Mayor.  It also opens up the possibility of voting
on local issues, such as neighbourhood improvement plans (like the
park scenario in my other posts).  That may be where the strongest
roots will take hold - closest to home.

-- 
Michael Allan

Toronto, 647-436-4521
http://zelea.com/