Liquid Feedback on SAFE

Any issue with adapting this platform for SAFE.

1 Like

1 Like

Liquid democracy seems like a very promising future idea


Its promising right now but on SAFE and verified open hardware it could be so amazing. They just crossed it with GIT so it can be used to help drive project development.

1 Like

In contrary, I don’t find liquid democracy so attractive, at least not in pure form. Although the idea itself might seem appealing to those who are disappointed with current political structures and systems around the globe, I find it impossible to work in practice.
Giving a voter a power to take away his support at every time is not a very good idea. In MHO, a politician should not take his decisions in constant fear of loosing his mandate - he/she should choose a path, that is right for community, although it is not likable or appealing. This is why politicians have their mandates - and although we might get angry when they abuse them, we should not penalize them for every decision, that is not aligned with our conscience.
On the other hand, I find the idea of LD very interesting to replace old and robust form of regular, periodic elections. We could give people more power to specifically give their vote to persons, not to parties.

You cannot delegate your power. Politicians are nothing in the scheme of things. It doesn’t matter what is good for them or what is not good for them or what is fair for them. And there are no mandates, especially of the conservative kind and this goes double with the current sponsored politicians. We have to get rid of hierarchy period. Its a simple matter of survival. The representative format should only come into play at some sort of standstill and even then it could be blinded and random to prevent credit taking. Politicians and their personalities must be removed from the process. The idea of a leader is seriously idiotic in most respects. The only only voice that is going to save us is our own. Searching for that voice outside ourselves is a self-fulfilling exercise in fear. Also given present present challenges it doesn’t matter is present culture may not quite be ready- when will it ever be ready?

There is a little bit of hierarchy between parent and child but that developmental sort is the only tolerable kind, but even in a educational setting between professor and student there must be mutual respect and trust and a two way flow information. An thing less than driving out hierarchy from almost everything means people are not free and their development is blocked at the pre-adolescent stage. It also means the potential in society is crippled.

1 Like

Well, Thomas More’s Utopia is 500 years old, and his remarkable ideas are still alive :slight_smile:

1 Like

A time and a place, and seems like that time and place is now. This system we’ve had since the dawn of agriculture got us to Q learning machines. Times they are a changing. No way we can have less liberty now than we had prior to language and tools, its not our natural state.

If we can limit democracy with NAP and then use it to hold all forms of power accountable to a hippocratic imperative, without any central points of failure for corruption to attack, then power becomes undesirable and impractical - since you keep getting held to account for it if you do harm. Pure freedom with direct accountability.

The trick will be in how to separate the wisdom of crowds from mob mentality, so whatever democratic system we use it needs to be pretty well-designed to ensure it homeostatically weedles out its own corruption and quietens the influencers with loud voices… a universal hippocratic imperative does allow a path to that - if you do harm by corrupting the system then anyone can anonymously and publicly hold you to account for it. We need to find a way to ensure democracy isn’t easily steered, never becomes dominion of the 51%, or moves beyond the bounds of NAP.

Dem-anarchy requires decentralising the media too, so it needs to be a very cleverly designed system for decentralised information flow and accountability.

Well, it’s certainly true that no one can represent you other than yourself, but hierarchy and leadership have their place, as long as they are voluntary and accountable. :slight_smile:


This sounds good except that right now the major problem that most democracies are facing is not politicians who just do what the people want without regard for longer-term, but a massive lack of accountability because politicians are confident that they can do anything, and so long as they time it right, the news media cycle will prevent them from facing any serious consequences.

I agree that the purest form of liquid democracy may have some negative effects, but honestly if politicians were afraid that acting contrary to the express wishes of their constituents would result in swift and significant penalties, that would be an enormous step in the right direction.

Furthermore the wonderful thing about technology is that it can be tuned. You could set up the system so that except at election times, the no confidence vote must be tied to a specific actions piece, a bill for instance. You could set up so that voting in favor of the Obamacare or the Patriot act (to cover all bases) would terminate your delegation to the representative, but only AFTER the vote was cast. That way if the representative believed that it was really in the best interests of the country, and really believed it was more important that his own political future, he is free to vote in favor, and his vote will count. But immediately after he will face the price.

But I think that right now the current political machines are tilted SO FAR the other way, there is such rampant lack of accountability, that its not sensible to worry about representatives who are too concerned about their constituents.


This is important. Also, I’m not sure there’s an answer :pouting_cat:

Maybe by agreeing that certain decisions have a higher weight or, if we want to be more literal in a Physics sense, mass: once they are set in motion in a particular direction, more force would be necessary to stop them or turn them around.

Or, by averaging decisions using exponential moving averages, where the more important decisions would have a longer period, thus they couldn’t be changed by a sudden change in the sentiment of the masses.

The determining of the mass / period of course would also be decided by the community but, to make sense, the mass / period of these “meta decisions” should always (e.g. automatically) be a multiple of that of their object.

Also this. I like. Though I must say I’m very cynical of politicians (it takes a lot of compromise to end up in a position where your word matters) so I’m not sure many would go ahead knowing with certainty that they would be getting booted.


I do love Postgres but this seems to be the kind of thing better done with a graph database.

I scrolled through their SQL schema. Their model seems very rigid and awfully specific; I don’t like that. Also, I can’t understand why they implemented a bunch of location stuff when Postgres has one of the most mature GIS extensions on the market.

In short, I like the idea, but I’m not impressed by the implementation. I’m sure we’ll see a better one on top of SAFE :smirk_cat:

1 Like

Love all of that and all of the other posts in this thread. We need it now! As far as hierarchy, I think it had its place. Its going to kill us if we don’t get over it. Agree 10,000% about decentralized media- sponsorship (censorship) is at least half of the problem in the world.

1 Like