Voting social network
Liquid democracy with many delegates makes a new voting social network possible.
New voting mechanisms enable liquid democracy with many delegates. A voting social network could be built so we can:
Inform us better and faster. Know what most humans think about something and why. Filter by profession, country, university, etc. Like my old side-project Agreelist, it could include the votes/opinions from both users and public figures. The latter have expressed their opinion on Twitter, in newspapers, etc. This way, you could delegate to Greta Thunberg, Bill Gates or The Pope even if they are not on the platform.
Vote on any topic — and explain the reasons behind your vote. For example, new laws approved by Congress, ideas for policies on AI governance or climate change, etc. Let decision makers — and training data for AIs — know what you think. Also, when you share your point of view, you could get feedback from others who challenge your views.
Have an evergreen constitution or law according to people’s wishes. Anyone could propose changes to the law. To decide if they are approved, and become the last version of the evergreen law, they are voted on by any human and their delegates. Or by any citizen or resident of a concrete country.
Vote and find the best books, videos and podcast episodes on concrete topics. E.g. The best book on maths for teenagers. You could find the most voted book according to direct votes only — or according to direct votes + delegations. Also, you could find the most voted in general or by people you follow and trust.
These votes would be informative — closer to polls. Yet, later, voting systems that guarantee secret votes could be connected. Serious secret votings use cryptography to guarantee that no single person can tamper or know what you voted for. Not even the administrators of the voting software.
The way to connect them could be described as two layers. Layer 1 (L1) would focus on secret votes and Layer 2 (L2) — the voting social network — to enable voters to:
Inform themselves browsing arguments like on Agreelist.
Have many delegates. This could include public lists of delegates. E.g. MIT professors.
Vote directly when they disagree with their delegates. They could also vote to signal to others that they know a topic and/or that they strongly support that position.
This way, people wouldn't be able to buy L1 votes because they are secret. They could only buy L2 votes — like paying someone to say something on Twitter.
To sum up, a voting social network could help society on its own. In the future, if it makes sense, it could even be connected to secret votings.