From: plmoses@unix.cc.emory.edu (Paul L. Moses)
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 20:51:45 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Better late than never, eh Stanton?
Message-ID: <9308230350.AA17349@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


>From hughes@toad.com Sun Aug 22 20:07:28 1993
>To: plmoses@unix.cc.emory.edu (Paul L. Moses)
>Subject: [plmoses@unix.cc.emory.edu (Paul L. Moses): forwarding]
>Date: Sun, 22 Aug 93 17:07:20 -0700
>From: hughes@toad.com
>
>
>------- Forwarded Message
>
>Return-Path: plmoses@unix.cc.emory.edu
>Received: from emoryu1.cc.emory.edu ([128.140.1.1]) by toad.com id AA25788; Tue, 17 Aug 93 09:19:15 PDT
>Received: by
>	emoryu1.cc.emory.edu (5.65/Emory_cc.3.4.6) via MAILPROG
>	id AA17454 ; Tue, 17 Aug 93 12:19:07 -0400
>Return-Path: plmoses@unix.cc.emory.edu
>Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 12:19:07 -0400
>From: plmoses@unix.cc.emory.edu (Paul L. Moses)
>Message-Id: <9308171619.AA17454@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu>
>To: owner-cypherpunks@toad.com
>Subject: forwarding
>
>>From anton@hydra.unm.edu Sun Aug 15 03:21:35 1993
>From: Stanton McCandlish <anton@hydra.unm.edu>
>Subject: Re: On The Inherent Evil of Electronic Democracy
>To: plmoses@unix.cc.emory.edu (Paul L. Moses)
>Date: Sun, 15 Aug 1993 01:21:25 -0600 (MDT)
>In-Reply-To: <9308121908.AA06721@emoryu1.cc.emory.edu> from "Paul L. Moses" at Aug 12, 93 03:08:00 pm
>X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL21]
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Length: 3327      
>
>Quoth Paul L. Moses, verily I say unto thee:
>- -=>
>- -=>Regarding the Electronic Democracy idea, I vote with Tim May.  Look at the
>
>Just the opposite here.
>
>One factor has been missing from this discussion.  
>
>Representative "democracy" is a statist imposition.
>
>One other factor:
>
>The number of issues to be voted on is quite large.  Even with easy access
>via cable-tv data networks, public voting kiosks, etc, no one will be able
>to keep up.  This will immediately result in demand for LESS legislation,
>which is a good thing no matter how you look at it.  
>
>Simple requirements for quorums before a proposition comes up for voting
>would head off most goofy bills right from the start.  If you have to have
>at least, say, 10% of the population to vote to ALLOW AN ISSUE TO EVEN BE
>VOTED ON, most idiot bills will be nipped in the bud.  One other thing
>you'll see disappear is "private laws".  Our congress wastes an incredible
>amount of time and money working on laws that affect only one corporation,
>or one small area.  For one thing, most of this stuff is irrelevant as far
>as the Law of the Land goes.  It's not something our legislature should be
>involved in.  Let companies work out their own damn problems.  For
>another, local-area laws should be handled by local areas.  Period.
>In my opinion.
>
>The main objection I keep seeing is that all them loonies will vote for
>stupid laws.  I'd like to ask you how many of these people vote NOW?  Not
>very many.  The idiotic, the lazy, and the careless do not vote, by and
>large.  The people that vote are the people that think about issues, and
>decide that they want to do something about them.
>
>Anyway, when some of this comes about, and it is quite inevitable, I would
>hope that a very least e-voting gives the people veto power, to directly
>overturn anything passed by congress and the prez, and even the power to
>kill bills before they even get past the discussion stage.  Add to that
>the right to directly propose legislation, provided there is a quorum, and
>I think that would be a good starting point.
>
>If all Tim and others with the same views are upset about is that a sudden
>change could result in utter chaos, I have no argument with that.  The
>changes must be gradual, so as to not cause a governmental backlash.  I
>can see just installing the system and cutting congress out of the picture
>entirely.  The resulting mess would be allowed to go on for about a month,
>before the pres declared martial law due to national emergency, and then
>it'd be all over.  One thing that irritates the hell out of me about many
>anarch[o-capital]ists and libertarians, is an all or nothing stance.  Some
>of you folks don't seem to clue to the ideas of compromise, gradual
>change, long-term planning, and strategic retreat to throw an enemy off
>balance.  You aren't going to take the world by storm, and Tim's dire
>predictions of a hell hole that would result if such occured are right on
>the mark. Play our cards right, and we'll take the world by whispering breeze.
>
>- -- 
>Stanton  McCandlish   * Space Migration * Networking * ChaOrder * NO GOV'T. *
>anton@hydra.unm.edu   * Intelligence Increase * Nano * Crypto * NO RELIGION *
>FidoNet:    1:301/2   * Life Extension * Ethics * VR * Now! * NO MORE LIES! *
>Noise in the Void BBS * +1-505-246-8515   (24hr, 1200-14400, v32bis, N-8-1) *
>
> 
>
>------- End of Forwarded Message
>
>