Bureaucrats, developer, Administrators
9,856
edits
The Consumerium Exchange: Difference between revisions
removing some of 142.177.X.X's edits for clarity
(noting issues) |
(removing some of 142.177.X.X's edits for clarity) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
The purpose of The Consumerium Exchange is to provide a weighting or combined measurement for different opinions, which determines the default opinion shown to the [[consumer]] on each issue. | The purpose of The Consumerium Exchange is to provide a weighting or combined measurement for different opinions, which determines the default opinion shown to the [[consumer]] on each issue. | ||
Each consumer can override the view of a given | Each consumer can override the view of a given [[interest group]] with her/his own [[preferences]] automatically or manually. One important preference is the slider to set how much weight direct and indirect votes get. Enabling automatic exclusion of votes based on preferences should also be possible. | ||
===Distribution of power=== | ===Distribution of power=== | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
The dual voting (direct+indirect) system provides improved reliability and flexibility for The Consumerium Exchange at the same time. Due to the dual voting system the exchange is less susceptible to distortion. It is propably better left unknown how people value these different votes on each issue or in general because it provides the intrigue and safety of not-knowing | The dual voting (direct+indirect) system provides improved reliability and flexibility for The Consumerium Exchange at the same time. Due to the dual voting system the exchange is less susceptible to distortion. It is propably better left unknown how people value these different votes on each issue or in general because it provides the intrigue and safety of not-knowing | ||
Counter measures against multivoting and vote buying should be meticulously evaluated | Counter measures against multivoting and vote buying should be meticulously evaluated. | ||
===Social network weighting=== | ===Social network weighting=== | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Such direct [[social network]] support would provide more strongly differentiated views on the issues if FOAF-aggregation is enabled in the preferences of the [[consumer]]. | Such direct [[social network]] support would provide more strongly differentiated views on the issues if FOAF-aggregation is enabled in the preferences of the [[consumer]]. | ||
Of course the consumer has to decide on a few organisations (minimum being one) s/he chooses to trust the most and the value of other participants is then relative to what organisations are saying about each other | Of course the consumer has to decide on a few organisations (minimum being one) s/he chooses to trust the most and the value of other participants is then relative to what organisations are saying about each other. | ||
One could ask well why not full campaigns on other campaigners? | One could ask well why not full campaigns on other campaigners? | ||