Voting is Flawed. Is There a Fix?

in #politics7 years ago (edited)

survey-1594962_1280.jpg

The many variations of voting systems seen throughout the world have all been reasonably flawed and unable to scale well beyond the size of a small classroom. Yet most of us still get involved anyway, simply because it's the way things work at the moment. We're just rolling with the punches. Even on Steem. What? You think the adults have it all figured out? The most important thing is to realise here is there are many flaws with our concept of voting.

First of all, not everybody can make and go through all proposals.

This is why most of our collaborative decision making processes only involve small groups of people determining what the general public votes on. You would think that in a society made up of individuals, we could all list our individual opinions, ordered algorithmically before getting a consensus through some voting process that covers it all. That's hardly even the case! Our methods of voting today are unable to scale well. There are bottlenecks whenever we pass information from one stage to the next.

Secondly, proposal list ordering is imperfect as we only have finite time and attention.

If you've tried curating on Steem, you will know what I mean. Even if the first ten that appears on screen are total crap, you might even push yourself to give out a vote for many different reasons like affinity to popularity, mood, relationship, patience, time, returns, etc. In small groups of people, the process may be fairly representative. But it all breaks down when we take it to the level of large communities.

Thirdly, most, if not all voters have incomplete knowledge.

Voters are assumed to be making informed decisions. Given the huge body of proposals, candidates, and socioeconomic complexities present in massive democracies, do voters really vote with full scrutiny and knowledge, or more likely through knowledge given off by information proxies we trust? Voting games usually end up being popularity contests.

Finally, voting systems can be easily exploited.

It doesn’t matter if voting is so-called tamper-proof and sybil-resistant through the use of indelible ink, identity checks, or even blockchain technology. There's just no way to properly secure any voting platforms, especially around the premise of one person, one vote (also known as account-based voting). Anyone telling you otherwise must have not thought through the problem well enough. Identity can be gamed, made up. This is why Bitcoin uses Proof-of-Work, and Steem, Delegated Proof-of-Stake. Not saying they're perfect, but they seem to work fairly well in massively open, permissionless environments where "Proof-of-Identity" is likely impossible.

Conclusion

Why do we ever vote in the first place? It's just a means to an end. It's a way for groups of people to come together through some method of consensus to achieve desired outcomes. Given the inefficiencies of the voting enterprise, what if we have something that works way better? Less friction, more satisfaction, and perhaps, much better outcomes?

Good news: it may be possible to surpass the performance limitations imposed by some of the outmoded voting implementations. A small group people are already working on it now. But it's certainly not just a simple upgrade, as it would be the same crap if we just try to shove legacy voting methodologies into blockchains. Voting is just a process to reach consensus anyway, so the point is to have better ways of achieving consensus in a way that the aggregate of participants feel is fair, inclusive, and representative.

Our traditional ways of achieving consensus will still be around for some time, even in the blockchain space. But I suspect their performance will be outpaced in great orders of magnitude by a platform that is able to actually scale discussions and consensus formation. Blockchains like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Steem are a glimpse of what is to come. Only time will tell. Please check out and meditate on these blogposts: The New Tau & The Power of Tau.

Some supporting resources

  1. Social Choice Theory
  2. Social Choice and Individual Values
  3. Arrow's Impossibility Theorem
  4. The Strategy of Voting: Social Preference Functions
  5. Electoral System
  6. Voting Paradox

Not to be taken as financial advice.
Follow me @kevinwong

Sort:  

You make some fine practical & philosophical points here, Kevin @kevinwong -- where to begin?

Voting, like democracy, like justice are the approximations of an ideal. As flawed humans in pursuit of such lofty aims, we're bound to fail. Some attempts, of course, are better than others.

Living in Egypt, voting was a sad farce. Our president would win the 'so-called' elections with 99.99% vote results, every year! Clearly, it was rigged--there was no opposition and Egyptians would joke that the dead must have been brought back to vote (to account for such high figures).

Living in the Divided States of America, at this historical moment is not much better, either. I voted for Obama the first time, but not the second. And, I could not get myself to vote for either Hillary or the Unspeakable One, now, in office. The 2 party system seems outdated; we need more choices.

Which brings us to this Utopian experiment, or social media revolution taking place on Steemit. Yes, there is corruption, here, too, with a pay to play mentality (bots, etc...) But, past that, I believe it aspires to a meritocracy.

There is curation, there are people with power and good taste, who rescue voices like mine from complete obscurity :) If one continues to work hard and produce quality content, they will be seen and endorsed. I really appreciate, for example, the auto-vote feature which allows artists like myself to feel like there are patrons of their work out there who appreciate/trust what they are doing enough to vote on it in advance.

Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the world, Shelley famously claimed -- which may seem outrageous considering how little money they make, online, and off. But, ideas and words, as you know, have another level of influence, past monetary. They change minds, even lives. And, I'm idealistic enough to believe that, with time, talent rises to the top :)

I believe in Steemit there is room for improvement, how to grant more security/incentives for thinkers and artists to stay on the platform and continue contributing. They needn't make the trending lists, but gaining the support of influential members of the community makes a difference.

How will the voting system be improved? Maybe quality content providers might be given a special badge, that rewards their efforts over time, and gives others contributors something to aspire to?

Yeah most voting systems are a farce since there are gatekeepers. Just gotta cross fingers and hope the gatekeepers aren't corrupted. Btw, gamification might be something on the table although honestly I don't know after so many delays in development!

Fingers, legs & eyes crossed, for good measure! Dunno what gamification means but looking forward to reading your new post on voting 🤓

Been waiting all morning (nearly 4 hours) to share an exclusive-to-Steemit short story of mine, that I suspect might tickle ya. And, now, that it finally posted, looks like Steemit is acting up, again 👀

You would think that in a society made up of individuals, we could all list our individual opinions, ordered algorithmically before getting a consensus through some voting process that covers it all.

I liked that idea, individuals should be relevant in decision making, especially in politics where mostly small numbers of people are only allowed to make decisions and this will deprived us some Good Ideas or even the best ideas that change our world faster and better.

Voting, as you tightly stated, is just a means to an end.....

A way to bring groups and entities together through some methods to achieve desired consensus.

So, even if Voting is just a process to reach consensus, the point is most definitely to have better ways of achieving consensus in a way that the aggregate of participants feel is fair, inclusive, and representative.

As for achieving perfection in voting, I do doubt that it could be possible, considering the myriad of corruption everywhere.....

So are we voting or... I'm confused :D
Let's just vote and see the result. Who knows maybe it will work out.

Hey Kevin just checking in. Made it form Ecuador to Patagonia and back....now I'm in Florida visiting family. I now have a bit of time to take a peak at your blog. You've been doing great work as always.

Voting, unreal how we have not been able to go the rout of Switzerland yet. Who uses a form of direct democracy which I think is best as the people vote for all significant decisions the county makes.

We can have blockchain money and everything on line. But yet we allow the voting systems around the world to be manipulated to the benefit of those in power. It's always great how you bring awareness to topics like these. Keep up the great work.

Next stop- New York City! Have a great day!- Dan "World Travel Pro!"

Yeah I actually like how Switzerland functions, they're pretty decentralised afaik.. and it works. Probably because of their position and geolocation as well. Have a great day to you too!

Interesting points you made here Mr. Kevin. Nice to see your still posting strong, hope your having a great year so far. Hopefully Steemit gets better and better with the abuse but, said truth is there's always people taking advantage that's life. Either way I still love it here on Steemit this idea of blockchain blogging still keeps making me come back and post even when sometimes I don't feel like it. Its the simple fact of you don't know who your goinh to meet next and you don't know which post will flourish with a nice upvote for your hard work. I'm very interested to see how the voting structure changes in the near future, it's inevitable. Time will tell. Stay humble and Steem on my friend!

You're right, it's so difficult combating exploits! Thanks @gre3n, keep posting!

You kind of alluded to the problem of voting as it pertains to larger groups of people. This is especially problematic with government. The larger the country, the more problematic simple majority voting becomes because of the way our government is constructed. In our current system, if 50.01% of the people (Or electoral college) vote for a leader, that leader is given the power of that office and is able to do what her/she likes. The other half of the population just has to sit there and take it. In a country as large as the United States this means that whole large groups can be effectively ignored because they aren't needed to get the necessary votes to win. And I'm not sure that a system that is structured to leave a 150 million or so of it's citizens disenfranchised is a good system. Leaving aside of course that the winning side usually doesn't get what it wants in terms of campaign promises either.

Politics is good and so the democracy but the corrupt politicians make politics bad, they are the one who made it dirty.

Whatever the process of voting whether it is manual or automated, there is always a loophole in it where the red-handed politicians take advantage for their gain.

Politics is bad, because it covers plunder, abuse, and murder under a veneer of civility. Democracy is a false god. No one can delegate to another party an authority they do not have as individuals. Governments necessarily operate through violation of the very rights they claim to protect and defend.

I do not agree with you on this. Politics isn't bad, democracy isn't bad. The true definitions of these concepts are in existence for the betterment of the society. Where's problem occurs is in the execution of the concepts

Do I have the authority to govern you? No. So I cannot delegate to anyone else such an authority either. Claims of political power are thus usurpation, and wholly illegitimate.

There is no agent/principal relationship between a politician and those who voted for him, much less such a relationship between the politician and those who voted against him, did not vote, or could not vote. Thus, democracy is a sham.

Society does not exist except as a description for the peaceful exchanges and interactions between people. Government is by definition a territorial monopoly on violence. People who call themselves "government" necessarily claim a special authority to violate the life. liberty, and property of everyone in the region they "govern." The incentives of political power guarantee corruption regardless of the intentions of the people in "government" or the founders of the "government." Politics is inherently anti-social. It cannot be executed justly, fairly, or for the betterment of "society" by its very nature.

Why do you disagree? What specific reasoning has led you to the position you hold?

You are talking about the practicality of the concepts... My point is the theoretical definitions of the concepts in themselves are not evil. The practicality of it however has been tainted by the human nature in its active form, hence your stance.

If a concept fails to work in reality every time it's tried due to readily-explainable phenomena, it isn't a theory, and it needs to be discarded. There is no way political power can work as advertised. That is why politics and economics can only be understood by beginning at the level of individual human action, and not at the scale of, "It would be great if..."

Now I get your point... It should be "what is" and not "what ought to be"

Almost. It's "what is" versus "what people imagine."

Imagine if I told someone making a sacrifice to Neptune/Poseidon before going on an ocean voyage were a complete waste, and the priesthood was knowingly or unknowingly suckering the people there to give offerings, but I was told in response it was necessary to ensure a safe voyage anyway. Tradition and the teachings of past generations become a burden and an impediment to progress if they are not periodically reexamined for validity.

Democracy is an expression of being free - Everyone is free to choose whoever they want to lead them, unlike dictatorship we have no choice at all and whoever disobeys will surely face consequences. We are free to choose but of course, the majority of votes will be held as the winner.

Word Root of politics. The Greek word polis, meaning “city” or “community,” and the related word polītēs, meaning “citizen,” give us the roots polis and polit. Words from Greek polis. Politics is the science and art of governing citizens.

Politics is simply an art of governing but the problem lies on those who govern who are corrupt and dirty-handed. They tainted the clean essence of politics.

Democracy is the political manifestation of the bandwagon fallacy, and has nothing whatsoever to do with choosing leadership. I know the root Greek word, but rulership destroys communities, and plunder is antithetical to the concept of society. Government is by definition a territorial monopoly in violence, and the perverse incentives of power guarantee corruption and abuse.

I do not have the authority to rule you. Our spheres of authority are limited by our reciprocal rights to life, liberty, and property. I cannot delegate to some third party any authority I do not have in the first place. How then can the democratic process give politicians the authority to tax, impose arbitrary laws against non-crimes, wage wars, or do any of the other things governments do? Just because 50%+1 if the populace engages n a voting ritual every few years? There isn't even an agent/principal relationship between those who voted for the winner, so how does a politician represent anyone else either?

It is because I support the idea of community that I oppose politics as a means to further it.

It would be nice if democracy meant anything at all in modern contexts. I agree with a lot of the same stuff you have probably read or think, glad to see others on steemit with some insight into how everything is just a veneer to cover up state-sanctioned violence to maintain power over people and resources. Like, damn, most in the West really think their purchasing power is a result of their own efforts. Must be hard for them to contain that growing cognitive dissonance when they realize raw materials are plundered from the world over for their creature comforts.

Systems are in place, on paper, to make voting systems perfect. The imperfection ofnthe human entity is however still reflected in the electoral processes, everywhere.

One can only hope to strive to be as close to perfection as the environment allows.

Voting System is worst in Pakistan. All the corrupt politicians don't want to set the bio-metric system to get accurate results. A number of votes are sold by the individuals forcefully or due to ignorance. Those people blindly believe on those corrupt politicians as they fulfill some of their needs.
Very informative Article indeed. Stay Blessed @kevinwong!