
Liberum Consilium: a system design for moderated deliberation [pdf] - akkartik
https://bytebucket.org/djarvis/world-politics/raw/master/xml/tex/manual.pdf
======
chm
I skimmed it. One thing that caught my attention is the so-called "RA":

    
    
        Prior to voting, voters must communicate their intent
        to participate with a Registration Authority (RA).
    

Nowhere is it discussed what exactly is the RA, who is part of it etc.
Moderators are supposedly "randomly" chosen and given a random amount of time
to do their job, but

    
    
        Reputation influences moderator selection. Relatively high
        positive reputation increases the odds of selection while
        negative reputation decreases it. This positive contributor
        bias aims to contain the influence of special interest groups.
    

That's not random and leaves space to game the system. I think giving more
moderating time to higher rep would be better than choosing moderators from a
small pool of users.

------
jhrobert
That's another attempt to fix the "representative democracy" crisis.

Unfortunately I saw nothing about "Liquid Democracy" delegations? With pure
direct votes only, participation will suffer because voting often on many
matters is inconvenient to most people.

The "tagging" of proposals is nice. However, who define the "tag hierarchy"?
Is it even necessary to have such a hieararchy, I don't think so.

------
mooneater
The token from the Registration Authority seems to defeat coercion-resistance
and receipt-freeness. Unless it was handled using strong crypto primitives
(and how long do those last?) that would preclude looking up how this one user
voted, it would result in a rather evil system.

Otherwise I like it.

