Voting and delegation would be private for most people, but public for those who have more than a certain number of pledged votes.
An alternative solution is, each person has two votes: a private vote and an optional public vote. The private vote counts directly, whereas the public vote only affects where the pledged votes go.
Hmm, seems like a reasonable proposal, but I think I prefer the original, because plenty of people would want to keep their pledge private. If you endorse a friend, that may cause trouble on a personal level in your friend circle; if you endorse a public figure—well, there are lots of controversial public figures.
Having said that, I do like that having two votes would keep people more engaged—since a downside to the original proposal is that after setting a pledge, people might just tune out of politics. (Although is that really a downside? Not sure).
The pledge is private. When you exercise your private vote, you can either vote directly on a policy or delegate to someone else. If you delegate, then your private vote is counted as the other person’s public vote (so you can know where your vote actually went). It is also possible to delegate your public vote, in which case the private votes delegated to you are delegated further down the chain of public votes. But in either case nobody knows how you used your private vote.
Oh, I see. So just to be clear: not everyone has a public vote, only the people who have already been delegated private votes?
I still prefer the original, because if I think about myself using the system, I would want to put my private vote and my public vote towards the same person. But then I’m outing myself. So then I’d have to water down my opinions when casting the public vote.
Basically I think the problem is only important for people who are casting thousands of pledged votes. So having a cutoff where people above that point are public and those below are private seems to get almost all the benefits, while avoiding the personal costs to almost everyone.
Everyone has a public vote, but if you haven’t been delegated anything then your public vote has no effect. It seems a little strange to worry about outing yourself. If you expect people to delegate their votes to you, then you should probably state your opinions publicly. If you don’t expect people to delegate their votes to you, then you can abstain from voting publicly. I guess it’s also possible to make the public vote “semipublic” so that only people who delegated their vote to that person know where it went.
An alternative solution is, each person has two votes: a private vote and an optional public vote. The private vote counts directly, whereas the public vote only affects where the pledged votes go.
Hmm, seems like a reasonable proposal, but I think I prefer the original, because plenty of people would want to keep their pledge private. If you endorse a friend, that may cause trouble on a personal level in your friend circle; if you endorse a public figure—well, there are lots of controversial public figures.
Having said that, I do like that having two votes would keep people more engaged—since a downside to the original proposal is that after setting a pledge, people might just tune out of politics. (Although is that really a downside? Not sure).
The pledge is private. When you exercise your private vote, you can either vote directly on a policy or delegate to someone else. If you delegate, then your private vote is counted as the other person’s public vote (so you can know where your vote actually went). It is also possible to delegate your public vote, in which case the private votes delegated to you are delegated further down the chain of public votes. But in either case nobody knows how you used your private vote.
Oh, I see. So just to be clear: not everyone has a public vote, only the people who have already been delegated private votes?
I still prefer the original, because if I think about myself using the system, I would want to put my private vote and my public vote towards the same person. But then I’m outing myself. So then I’d have to water down my opinions when casting the public vote.
Basically I think the problem is only important for people who are casting thousands of pledged votes. So having a cutoff where people above that point are public and those below are private seems to get almost all the benefits, while avoiding the personal costs to almost everyone.
Everyone has a public vote, but if you haven’t been delegated anything then your public vote has no effect. It seems a little strange to worry about outing yourself. If you expect people to delegate their votes to you, then you should probably state your opinions publicly. If you don’t expect people to delegate their votes to you, then you can abstain from voting publicly. I guess it’s also possible to make the public vote “semipublic” so that only people who delegated their vote to that person know where it went.