[EM] Practical Democracy

[Fred Gohlke]

Good Afternoon, Frank

re: "I think I may have found a more fundamental point
      of divergence in Our perspectives."

Yes.  You've certainly found a fundamental point of divergence in our 
perspectives.  Indeed, several points.


re: "Reading Acquaintances /accurately/ requires time, energy,
      and a certain degree of familiarity. The system You propose
      does not make clear such requirements are met."

When we are motivated to evaluate people and have a week or more to do 
so, we are quite effective at it.  Of course, some of us are better at 
it than others.  As anyone following this thread can see, I'm quite slow 
to judge others.  Of course, my motivation is not to evaluate those I 
converse with.  My motivation is to participate in a thoughtful 
examination of democratic systems.  Your motivation may be different.


re: "I don't see how Your discussion of (1a) addresses
      My concern."

Your concern was expressed specifically as:

      "By "replace the Representative", I mean in the subsequent
      election cycle, if out of sheer coincidence an identical
      triad from last time is formed, deciding whether the Person
      selected to represent at the next stage is chosen again."

Paragraph 1a specifically prevents an "identical triad from last time" 
being formed, whether by "sheer coincidence" or any other means.  If 
that does not address your concern, you'll have to describe the precise 
method by which your concern can occur in considerably more detail than 
you've done so far.


re: "I find polling and referenda have the same flaws
      of recalls."

Indeed you may, but if you feel so strongly on the point, perhaps you 
could describe the method you'd prefer.  As I've pointed out, the PD 
process does not specify a method.  It simply suggests a mechanism by 
which some form of post-electoral control can be implemented.  Adding 
your preference might be helpful to those considering the concept.

Fred Gohlke