[EM] Fwd: Advocacy

[aGREATER.US]

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "aGREATER.US" <info at aGREATER.US>
> Date: November 26, 2012, 9:38:06 PM EST
> To: "ElectionMethods at VoteFair.org" <ElectionMethods at VoteFair.org>
> Subject: Re: [EM] Advocacy
> 
> I'm open to a better voting method. ;o)
> 
> Here are some constraints. It is my experience that because policy work is so complex, most folk take a pass. That is why I designed this with only 500 word summaries. I wrote the first five items, and I couldn't reach a cognizant solution in less words. Tom Atlee, arguably the dean of modern democracy theory in the US has said my method is valid as long as I get enough participants. On the other hand,  Jim Wise has shown that as few as a dozen people can arrive at a solution a wider universe will endorse. See the MacLeans People's Verdict study. I'm not sure my process is as much an election as it is a winnowing of choice creation. My site is threefold, some ideas are reflective almost immediately and they are mostly the well known items, then there are original yet somewhat mainstream ideas that take awhile for the dear readers to digest, and lastly there are outside the box ideas that will take a good while to seek their level. It has been said that people really don't fear change they do fear loss. And some ideas on my site challenge a person's core beliefs and that's not necessarily a welcome thing to many people. I on the other hand have changed my mind on some loooong held beliefs this year both left and right, and believe I am better off for it. 
> 
> Cheers
> Jon 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 8:24 PM, Richard Fobes <ElectionMethods at VoteFair.org> wrote:
> 
>> I gave 5 stars to the Ban Single Mark Ballots proposal.
>> 
>> FYI, I did not post that proposal.  Jon Denn posted the proposal using the executive summary he copied from the website copy of the Google Docs original.
>> 
>> (I did work with Jon to post there a tax-reform proposal named "Tax The Takers More Than The Makers.")
>> 
>> Based on the vote-counting method used at the site -- it uses score ballots -- I was tempted to vote one star for the "competing" "American Anti-Corruption Act."  But I didn't.  I gave it 5 stars too.
>> 
>> This sheds light on a question someone else posed: Why aren't better voting methods actually used in small organizations?  The choice of which method is "best" is not obvious.  And when voting is done by people who understand how to vote strategically, the strategy-vulnerable methods -- in this case score-ballot-based counting -- easily produce unrepresentative results.
>> 
>> Richard Fobes
>> 
>> On 11/26/2012 10:02 AM, Jonathan Denn wrote:
>>> United Republic has a new high profile attempt at change with the
>>> American Anti-Corruption Act. Of course, it doesn't address Banning
>>> Single Mark Ballots. On my site BSMB has an 83% approval rating which is
>>> a weighted average of conservatives, independents, and liberals. While
>>> this is a very good rating, even greater, it really needs to be up in
>>> the 90s to get real notice. So, if you could take a few moments, go to
>>> aGREATER.US <http://aGREATER.US>, sign up (it just takes a minute),
>>> click on http://www.agreater.us/billpage.php?id=400 , and give it 5
>>> stars: I can then more confidently push this in my meetings and tweets.
>>> Also, UR has some real juice, so if their folk come to rate AACA and
>>> then hang out for awhile they may learn about (y)our efforts.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jon
>> 
>> 
>> ----
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
>> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20121126/05247caa/attachment-0002.htm>