TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

An open, facebook-integrated instant global democracy

As of today, the world's first truly open facebook-integrated global instant democracy is a reality. Unlike other voting systems online - reddit and ted.com comments etc. - it's not about voting on the opinions. It's about voting on their subjects.

Why are subjects important? Because for the first time we can actually say what someone's opinion is really about. And group votes for or against those subjects. It makes no sense to vote for a hashtag but voting for or against subjects that share hashtags makes a race - and a whole new kind of democracy.

This kind of democracy is a Facebook game that turns voting into a social act. When people go into some dark room and pull a lever or press a button you've got all that BS about hanging chads and who watches the watchmen and lobbyism and so on. But when everyone's opinions on every subject are open and public - when everyone's votes can be counted by everyone - that's a democracy you can trust.

Right now this is alpha software, brand spanking new, without a lot of important content. But if you care about democracy, if you can stand up for or against something - if something really matters to you from cafeteria lunches to the way your taxes are spent - this new way to argue and win or lose an argument is the way forward.

We waste opinions all over the internet - they can't count if we don't count them. But try http://www.doshmosh.com and speak your mind. Pick a side. Make a choice. Take a stand. Connect to the people who feel the same way you do - take power back from the bureaucrats and share it with the people you trust - your friends.


Closing Statement from Peter Merel

The feedback here has been very helpful. In particular Pavlin Angelov's criticism of the funding model has caused us to rethink it. We're moving it to become more in line with the Google Adsense/Adwords model. Thanks to everyone for your comments.

If you'd like to learn more there's a deeper and saltier discussion of the way DoshMosh works at http://dudespaper.com/dudeism-the-first-religion-with-a-moshpit.html/ .

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Oct 8 2012: Hi Peter,

    How does linking to external documents help create a sophisticated compromise?

    My point is that having reps with a certain level of licence (balanced by accountability) would create an environment where negotiations and compromise could be reached.

    Linking to external documents doesn't solve this issue.

    Also, books are technology.

    • Oct 10 2012: Hi Austin,

      While not its primary purpose, the semi-lattice of category and subject tags in DoshMosh could be used to construct an arbitrarily complex structure of rules, with the detail for each rule depending on whatever document is linked to the highest karma opinion within it.

      The trouble is, this becomes far too sophisticated to be practical, and does so with alarming speed.

      For example, say we pick the somewhat obscure sport of Geelf (http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?RulesOfGeelf). We could make a context for each rule - (#geelf #club), (#geelf #sharing), (#geelf #hitting #ducks) and so on. And then create a subject for the effect of each rule. (#geelf #hitting #ducks $disqualification) for instance.

      Say you feel disqualification is too severe a penalty for winging a duck. You put up an opinion in DoshMosh saying "In #geelf, #hitting #ducks should just be a $100-point-penalty, not a %disqualification". And then the various Geelf afficianadoes - point - could vote for or against this and other alternatives.

      I might even reply saying I'd be willing to support your opinion so long as you agreed with "$disqualification from a #geelf game for #hitting #ducks #on-purpose". Voting theory being a very deep and subtle domain, we could rapidly achieve a set of compromise rules for Geelf that rival the sophistication of Calvinball (http://littlebobeep.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Calvinball1.gif).

      So I suggest that a governance procedure be layered on top of the DoshMosh system whenever it's to be used for a real-world decision. It's not clear to me that reps are required to create or enforce such a procedure ...

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.