in Critch’s framework, agents bet their voting stake rather than money! The more bets you win, the more control you have over the system; the more bets you lose, the less your preferences will be taken into account.
If I may be a one-note piano (as it’s all I’ve talked about lately on LW), this sounds extremely similar to the “ophelimist democracy” I was pushing. I’ve since streamlined the design and will try to publish a functional tool for it online next year, and then aim to get some small organizations to test it out.
In brief, the goal was to design a voting system with a feedback loop to keep it utilitarian in the sense you’ve discussed above, but also utilitarian in the Bentham/Sidgwick sense. So that you don’t have to read the linked blog post, the basic steps in voting in an organization run on “ophelimist democracy” are as follows, with the parts that sound like Critch’s framework in italics:
1. Propose goals.
2. Vote on the goals/values and use the results to determine the relative value of each goal.
3. Propose policy ideas.
4. Bet on how well each policy will satisfy each goal.
5. Every bet is also automatically turned into a vote. (This is used to evade collusive betting.)
6. The policy with highest vote total * weighted bet value is enacted.
7. People are periodically polled regarding how satisfied they are with the goals, and the results are used to properly assign weights to people’s bets.
If I may be a one-note piano (as it’s all I’ve talked about lately on LW), this sounds extremely similar to the “ophelimist democracy” I was pushing. I’ve since streamlined the design and will try to publish a functional tool for it online next year, and then aim to get some small organizations to test it out.
In brief, the goal was to design a voting system with a feedback loop to keep it utilitarian in the sense you’ve discussed above, but also utilitarian in the Bentham/Sidgwick sense. So that you don’t have to read the linked blog post, the basic steps in voting in an organization run on “ophelimist democracy” are as follows, with the parts that sound like Critch’s framework in italics:
1. Propose goals.
2. Vote on the goals/values and use the results to determine the relative value of each goal.
3. Propose policy ideas.
4. Bet on how well each policy will satisfy each goal.
5. Every bet is also automatically turned into a vote. (This is used to evade collusive betting.)
6. The policy with highest vote total * weighted bet value is enacted.
7. People are periodically polled regarding how satisfied they are with the goals, and the results are used to properly assign weights to people’s bets.