[EM] New Critrerion: The Co-operation/Defection Criterion

[Kathy Dopp]

> From: MIKE OSSIPOFF <nkklrp at hotmail.com>

> I'm sure that delegation would be great. It's part of my direct democracy proposal
> that I posted here. Ballots could be identified by an anonymous voter ID number. A voter
> could indicate that, on any issue or election on which s/he doesn't vote, hir voting power
> would go to a delegate priorly designated by hir. S/he, in fact, could designate a ranking of delegates,
> so that, for instance, if hir 1st delegate doens't vote on a question, hir voting power would go to hir
> next-ranked delegate. Or, alternatively, if s/he chooses, s/he could indicate that s/he wants her
> voting power, in such instance, to follow the delegation ranking designated by that delegate of hirs.

MIke,

I like your idea and the way you use s/he and hir.

Why not make the idea better yet?  Allow all voters to select a
different representative for each issue of interest to the voter, so
that one rep might be tasked to vote on environmental issues, another
on education issues, and perhaps another on foreign trade treaty
issues or on judicial appointments....  A voter could simply select a
person to vote on all issues, or select separate persons for different
issues.  I guess a potential problem with this is that some issues
overlap and Congress would have to stop the horsetrading process of
throwing dozens of unrelated things into the same bill.

>
> I posted that proposal some years ago. Look for it by searching for "Direct Democracy, Ossipoff"
>
> or "Proxy Direct Democracy", or "Proxy Direct Democracy, Ossipoff".
>

Kathy Dopp
http://electionmathematics.org
Town of Colonie, NY 12304
"One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the
discussion with true facts."
"Renewable energy is homeland security."

Fundamentals of Verifiable Elections
http://kathydopp.com/wordpress/?p=174

View some of my research on my SSRN Author page:
http://ssrn.com/author=1451051