reply on: What if humanity voted by burning sats \ stacker news ~Politics_And

pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @398ja 29 May \ on: What if humanity voted by burning sats Politics_And_Law

I believe what you are describing is what is known as quadratic voting.

I did not know the term, interesting! The similarity lies in being able to vote in "variable amounts" , the difference is that it costs you actual money and not credits specifically created for that purpose, making it more costly to the voter

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @398ja 29 May

Yes. The advantage of using voting tokens is that it creates a level playing field, assuming everyone receives the same number of tokens.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @snufon OP 22h

As written elsewhere I don't think that's an advantage :^)

50 sats \ 1 reply \ @398ja 20h

I think the system you describe could be better than what we have now, but it unfairly favours wealthy countries. I find the mix of borderless money with country's elections questionable.

In the end, you may not have your country for too long...

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @snufon OP 16h

As brought up by someone else, the money could also be sent to that country's government instead of being burned. You would have even less incentive to vote on laws of other countries.

Also, I think that the huge disparity in the different countries' power/wealth are unfortunately very hard to fix by anything... This reminds me of Bitcoin criticism that goes something like "rich people can just buy a lot of btc and stay rich": yeah it's unfortunate but there's not much we can do about it, it's an issue deeper than Bitcoin/the voting system... Still a stepup IMO