RE: Just So We're Clear - The Tech Manager of Steemit Is Anti Democracy and Pro Oligarchy - in His Own Words.
Direct democracy invalidates Representing anything. It's the choices of the majority, that's all, hence why democracy is always the majority voting to eat the minority for dinner.
Direct democracy is at least better than representational democracy which is the illusion that the people have a voice - at least direct democracy gives people a real voice. However, yes, democracy is not a balanced approach - regardless of it's application.
With regards the issue of vote weight and power etc. - I have recently made several posts that demonstrate how the witness voting system on steemit.com is acting to conglomerate power in the hands of the top 50 witnesses (some of which are actually dead accounts) - which serves ultimately to centralise power in a very 'deep state' kind of way - in other words 'the game is rigged'. The point has been raised by numerous people over the last year+, yet no fix has been forthcoming. Witnesses are intended to be the ones who choose to accept or reject a hardfork - it is a selling point of the system and a key point in it's design. This design point is being circumvented.
Democracies are dangerous.
Perhaps what Steemit needs is a "Constitution." Acknowledging the users have certain rights, such as transparency of leadership... ??? ...
That sort of insane decision is infact more likely where there is no democracy, and in countries at the whim of some Dictator. I agree that starting from a Constitution is wise in all cases....but then again how and who decides what goes into the Constitution? Wide consensus would be needed....which is essentially direct democracy with an high quota.
It seems that with or without a "contract" (it's not a contract, it's a CORPORATE CHARTER) it's still a Fraudulent and Predatory as ever: Every Banking Act.
The only arrangement that protects the rights of the minority is a Republican form of Government, otherwise known as a Re-Public but as the Pubic has stopped showing up and Governing themselves, others have filled that void and they gave them Citizenship over Independence, Freedom and Sovereignty because people erroneously think that Citizen and Sovereign are the same thing or they could EVER describe the same thing.
Yes, democracy does not fully respect free will!
I'm not sure how a constitution can really be used in practice without it involving some kind of force, which would have to be encoded into the steem blockchain logic. I think EOS has some kind of allowance for this but it might require Dan's deliberate insertion of it from the get-go for it to work. We shall see.
Better how? Better why?
Umm it seems that in the end you conclude that it's not a "balanced" approach? What could be MORE balanced? Its balance won't change the fact that it's still a poor idea.
You see a few people participating in the voting and you disregard their ability to vote. What else is there to say, you think that people cannot use their vote effectively, what I want to know is what is the qualia for Centralization of Power if you consider a list of 50 people that omits 350 others or relegates them to being picked by typing in the name as an impendent to people voting, and ultimately positing that those whose votes actually count, or the ones whos accounts are Powerd Up are somehow unable to use the functionality of the website to vote for anyone other than the top 50. It's one leap of logic to another, I don't buy it, demonstrate that a) centralization of power in a very 'deep state' kind of way and b)game is rigged are apt descriptions and not blatant misrepresentations and exaggerations compounded with asenine insinuations of inVestor's lack of common sense.
Better because at least if I personally get to register a vote on specific issues, my vote (might) count for something. Representational democracy is just a farce that pretends to give people a voice, but which in practise only serves to concentrate vast power in the hands of the few. How many people ever meet their 'representative'? How many people's real voice is reflected in the actions of the representative? The number is tiny in both cases.
A voluntarist society would be more balanced than democracy and it requires an evolution of the heart and a willingness to live peacefully. I have written several times on this, but for some reason google isn't brining up the most relevant posts. Here's one that covers the topic to some extent:
https://steemit.com/politics/@ura-soul/an-economic-model-for-world-peace-heartism-plus-understanding-capitalism-vs-communism-and-voluntarism
I have no idea what this line refers to.
Here's some data on that:
https://steemit.com/steem/@ura-soul/does-the-fact-that-the-witness-voting-page-only-shows-50-witnesses-effect-the-voting-outcome-an-analysis-of-the-spread-of
Here's a solution that would be EASY to implement:
https://steemit.com/utopian-io/@ura-soul/suggestion-improved-witness-voting-page-for-steemit-com
Only just now I was informed (as often happens) that someone wanted to vote for me and thought he had voted for me, but the vote wasn't logged in SteemD (but WAS showing in steemit.com). Just another 'bug'.
Either way, you don't have a clear reason why it's better than "representative is worse". And concerning steem then you want everyone to have an equal vote for the witnesses? And how and why is that better anyway?
More balanced how and why? A million buzzwordz won't change the fact that an idiotic idea no matter how balanced will never be a great idea. You cannot turn roadkill into a top cut of beef, no matter how much sauce you give it or how you grill it.
That's about you Disregarding people's ability to vote (poor witness voting page), people who represent a minority not by design but by choice (how many accounts with over 1000 SP do you think are "manipulated" or "impaired" in their voting by the voting page?
of course, it often happens, what else would you need to substantiate that besides one person.
You asked me why direct democracy was better, I explained why it is better. the end.
your statement 'have an equal vote for the witnesses' is imprecise. to clarify, I simply want all witnesses to be visible in the list from which people make their votes.
I do not equate voluntarism with democracy, so unless you are calling voluntarism an idiotic idea, again, I am not clear what you are saying here.
I think you have misinterpreted something I have written because I have no idea what you are talking about here - it just doesn't fit in with the situation. I am not disregarding anyone's ability to vote.
Any account owner, regardless of their SP is going to be hindered in the process of freely choosing a voting candidate, if they cannot see all of them - it's not difficult to understand is it?
Yeah, it's better than representative because representative is worse, that's called explaining. /s
The context was, and is, Representative Democracy vs Direct Democracy and I related that to Steem. Yeah I get it, the list should include all the witnesses, not that each vote should be the same.
I'm calling democracy a dumb idea. Voluntarism is the de facto state of the world.
Simply saying that doesn't make it true, you realize that, don't you? To actually demonstrate that you'd have to explain How and Why their choices are hindered. Choosing a voting candidate from a list or by typing it in doesn't change anything, they aren't hindered in choosing, they are hindered in skipping a step in the process of voting. I didn't misunderstand anything, I can fathom the numerous implications of displaying only the top 50 witnesses but I seriously doubt you understand the concept of freely choosing (freedom of choice, volition) and think that exaggerating it to Conveniently choosing passes for the same concern, it doesn't. They can choose anyone they wish, even people that aren't in the top 50, can they not?
I already provided a link to an analysis that shows how the amount of votes received by users in the 40/50 region jumps fairly profoundly. I have spoken with a witness who moved into the top 50 fairly recently and who confirmed that it is unfair and he receives hugely more votes now he is in the top 50. I can also show two posts from the last few hours where people have tried to vote for me using the steemit witness page and they have typed my name in, the interface has shown that they have voted for me, but the vote was not logged in the blockchain.
If you cannot understand how this is unfair then that is not my problem.
a) They have no way of knowing who the witnesses outside of the top 50 even are, unless they do significant amounts of research.
b) Even when they do choose someone outside of the top 50, there are at least two major reasons why there is a good chance their vote will fail.
Because thoes things are Front end and you think that Steem has ANYTHING to do with that.
So they have a way.
So they can't because Steemit won't allow it?
Without Steem, Steemit is completely useless - but in any case I am really only talking about issues in Steemit.com and not issues in Steem.
Several users who have commented on this issue over several posts in the last few days, that I have made, have said that for most of the time they used the system they had no idea how witnesses functioned or what the voting was for - so they just pretty much randomly clicked on names from the list of the top 50 to make up their 30 votes. This appears to be more common than people actually doing research.
They have a way, but they ware unlikely to take it and in any case, whether they have a way or not does not change the fact that the situation is unfair.
One issue, as stated multiple times here already, is that the votes often aren't even logged. The other issue is that the design of the 'vote' button and text input works in a way that is counter to expectation - you type in the name and click 'vote' and then the user's name and a 'vote circle' icon appears. In a large number of cases, people then click the new 'vote circle' button - thinking that they need to do that to vote. The then unvote the account. You can look through the history of votes for probably all of the witness accounts below the top 50 and you will see many examples of votes being cast and then immediately uncast - this is where people unvote accidentally. I catch some of them, but surely not all of them. This is the THIRD hindrance witnesses below 50 face and for no good reason.