Thoughts at Random

The main idea: Fred Gohlke’s idea of iteratively setting up groups of 3 people who vote on each-other’s progression to ever-higher tiers presents the only credible alternative to liberal democracy. 0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 22.11.2021, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form. 0.1 The Tryptic Model of elections featured in part 2 of this post is not mine at all, but was devised by Fred Gohlke as practical democracy , to which system I'm making relatively minor changes mechanics-wise and explaining in my own words below. Still, though the system is almost unchanged, the context to which I apply Gohlke's idea couldn't be more different, the original tweak to empower real democracy here made into a full alternative to liberal democracy. Thus, all resulting errors, departures from the original design or broader implications readers may choose to dr...

The main idea: conditional consols are a cheap and easy way to implement futarchy today. 0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 02.12.2022, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form. 1.1 Robin Hanson’s futarchy proposes we give prediction markets some role in governing nations or other organisations, in the former case by having people vote on beliefs but bet on results. 1.2 A grave issue with this otherwise interesting proposal is the lack of a quantifiable goal (the “belief” part) that can be fed to the markets, this being AFAIK one of the vectors by which Moldbug attacked the idea. 1.3 But fear not, for whilst true futarchy may be a highly speculative proposal today, there’s a much simpler iteration available to us right now, and which delivers much of the promise but requires less of the suspension of disbelief. A poor man’s version of futarchy, if you will. I eve...

The main idea: the Left gravitates towards a Corporatist and then Socialist Oligarchy, as the Right does towards an Interventionist Autocracy run by a strong man. 0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 25.04.2022, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form. 0.1 I have not read De Jouvenel (they stopped asking us to attend the office, can't fit long from unless on the way there and from) though I am aware of many “in a nutshell” versions digested by others. Further, I have not read C.A. Bond either (unavailable, though I remember the blog) and there go the two authorities on the HLvM model. If below one finds any silliness that would have been easily avoided by anyone who had read either of them, now you know how it got there.    0.2 This post is a fluff piece, containing analysis and commentary but no proposed solution to some issue. I try to keep this sort of ...

The main idea: a corporatist system where only corporations of a certain minimal market cap would be allowed to operate any economic activity at all would be a great improvement over straight socialism. 0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 26.09.2022, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form.   1 The system 1.1 The efficient implementation of a truly corporatist economic system requires publicly-listed firms acting as clearinghouses of their own shares, as discussed previously . 1.2 Now that one’s market cap is an actionable datum, you can put all the weight of the world on it. Only firms of at least X value are allowed to operate and serve the market. The X would be such as to allow the operation of no more than a couple dozen firms in the whole country. The end. 1.3 X would be enforced by establishing the appropriate lower limit to the price the firm ...

The main idea: STV needs to be amended into the Uber Open List when applied to factionalised party settings.  0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 03.12.2021, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form. 1 A general theory of STV applicability 1.1 The Single Transferable Vote is a remarkable family of voting systems, claiming universal applicability across a wide range of scenarios, from picking where to eat out to picking a Legislature. 1.2 Nevertheless, in practice the claim comes just short, and STV requires some fine-tuning to live out to its true potential. 1.3 Let's distinguish voting scenarios by the degree of politicisation, which I’ll define for my purposes here as the likelihood of correctly predicting the subsequent preferences of one’s vote from the voter’s first preference. 1.4 At one end, the predictive power of first preferences is low, and you have yo...

The main idea: replace the CEO and C-suite with a triumvirate of Executives 0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 01.09.2025, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form.  1.1 Yet more fruit born of Gohlke's Practical Democracy: replace the CEO with a triumvirate. 1.2 Coalesce all CEO-1 roles into just three Executives amalgamated such as to be roughly equivalent in complexity. As an example, have a Chief Operating Officer in charge of production, a Chief Revenue Officer overseeing sales, and a Chief Corporate Officer overseeing finance, IT and such. Vary by context.  1.3 The decisions taken by the CEO are allocated to each individual Co-CEO as remit requires (most decision are here), retained to be discussed and voted upon jointly (a minority of decisions are here), or kicked up to the Board (a very few are here). 1.3 Note how we've now created a Management Boa...

 The main idea: various amendments to the democratic procedure that may be of interest. 0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 11.12.2022, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form. I will keep adding new relevant ideas to this post as I go. 0.1 Whilst I have little faith in a possibly less shonky version of democracy to be attempted once ours crashes, such faith is still non-zero, so see below some ideas related to better electorate selection algorithms and other design changes to be considered for such a system. Goes without saying, that any such system would uphold the sovereignty of the legislature, enough of this judicial review nonsense. All these I consider inferior in promise to Gohlke's  idea on this matter. 1.1 First, everyone votes, but voting rights are issued well in advance of an election (probably right after any election, valid for the next one...

The main idea: Proportional Westminster government by way of either parallel voting or random ballot.   0. Posts on this blog are ranked in decreasing order of likeability to myself. This entry was originally posted on 22.09.2022, and the current version may have been updated several times from its original form.   1 Business as usual 1.1 A rather obvious and low-risk way of making a Westminster design more proportional is to elect the vast majority of the House through single-winner ridings, and a small minority (a fifth to a quarter) from a nation-wide party-list. Such a small top-up is more than enough to ensure good (not perfect) proportionality. Avoiding the notorious decoy list issues that such systems face is easy if you rely on one vote only but you need not: you can still issue each voter two linked ballots, one for their riding (with the whole country allocated into ridings) and a nation-wide ballot listing parties only. 1.2 Those competing in the single-w...