⿻ 數位 Plurality: The Future of Collaborative Technology and Democracy

matching funds should be proportioned to the square of the sum of square roots of individual contributions, giving greater weight to a large number of small contributors than to a few large ones.[449] Recently designs have stretched beyond traditional individualistic designs to account for ⿻ group interests and affiliations.[450]

a natural way to fund public/supermodular goods without relying excessively on the limited knowledge of administrators is for such an administrator, philanthropist, or public authority to match contributions by distributed individuals.

proposed having owners self-assess the value of their property under penalty of having to sell at this self-assessed value.[447]

The limited remit and strength of international governance create severe bounds on the ability to provide transnational public goods through voting and deliberation, but the almighty dollar (and yuan) is respected in most corners of the planet. Capital flows and the technology it is invested in shape lives around the world.

Quadratic liquid democracy: As noted above, a natural way to avoid the power concentrations that liquid democracy can give rise to is the use of degressive proportionality. RadicalxChange, a non-profit advancing ⿻, has implemented a related system for its internal decision-making.

it aggregates not just the direction of individual preferences but also their strength.

Uncoordinated voters on average cancel one another out and thus the total influence of 10,000 completely independent voters is much smaller than the influence of one person with 10,000 votes.[429]

we form far deeper attention in common action and experience than in verbal exchange.

the simple equality assumed in such a tally is not widely legitimate. Different participants in a vote may have differing degrees of legitimate interest in an issue