Not so fast. Maybe the problem can be fixed at its source. That is always the best place to fix the problem.

So we come full circle here. What is it that forms manipulative but non-genuine coalitions? Sociopaths.

We need to solve the problem of sociopaths in positions of power and control.


But many will not accept the responsibility to condemn (or lets call it holding others accountable for their actions) without anonymity.

I agree, there are good arguments for both sides. It would appear that history has settled on the secret ballot as being best, so there must be good reasons for it.

But, of course, history doesn't always get it right.

Chico, I am asking one last time for my personal info to be taken OFF this forum. I EXPECT IT TO BE DONE TODAY.

well C as much as I don't like to reduce all arguments to a psychological cause.... I will (for a moment) do just that ..... People are creatures that have a public and private persona. We like to idealize our public persona...since it is what we aspire to be..... however we are a lot more honest with our private personas and when our anonimity protects our egos we are going to be more honest. For example, I have learned that at least 3 people want me to take a hike, which either means all my haters rushed in to vote, or some people who wouldn't otherwise say feel empowered to express themselves.

Which is why I have to agree with your take at this point. We want people to feel like they can express themselves about the site.

I agree to the extent that the history of pyramid organization advocates for the secret ballot. But we are trying for a new geometry are we not? The planar organization, with historical small scale examples here and there ... requires transparency in much greater measure than the pyramid organization. Indeed, the pursuit of truths will be one of the founding stones of any lasting planar organization; and not just a rarefied principle as it is in current pyramid organization. Truth and transparency are quintessential twins, as a rule ... with essential exceptions (e.g. Ugly Betty, bedroom privacy, etc.).

In short, the present and future demands transparency.

At the very least, rights must be hitched to responsibility. Here, the right to condemn must not be unhitched from the responsibility of condemnation. Anonymity unhitches things and removes responsibility. It baffles me that this point is still being discussed ... for it is an obvious point. You don't execute a man without facing him first. I understand that the tiger waits in the grass to pounce on the unsuspecting lamb ... but just humans must give due process and take full responsibility.

The secret ballot on the pyramid ... has justifiable reason, e.g. to protect the base from the power of the capstone.

The secret ballot on the plane ... has neither a capstone nor a base to warrant protection, and by extension, no justifiable basis.

I request that Chico remove anonymity from all polls ... or at the very least, put the secret ballot on its own
transparent poll. To wit, secret ballot on the plane only profits the no-gooders.

here's the thing. In a case like this one has to decide whether it is an issue of transparency of an issue of Privacy. For example, we would never say that a person's right to not have it revealed that they have cancer, or aids, when applying for a job is an issue of transparency... we understand that issue involves privacy.

A democracy is founded equally on two pillars: self determination (the right for one to pursue self interest) of which privacy is a main component (4th amendment) and freedom of expression is a main component (1st amendment). The second pillar is utilitarian, what is better for the group. So for example, one can ask if a private or public ballet better for the most people? legal decisions are also based on this pillar: i.e. we know the bloody rag convicts the killer but it was obtained by the police illegally searching so, we sacrifice a victory now (putting the killer away) for the good of the group (control police tactics). We take money away from the person pursuing self interest now so we can see to the group in the future (social security what it is supposed to be). In this last case we inhibit self interest (taking money) to use this money.

So in this case a secret ballot does not reinforce a cabal by necessity. Secret societies are not even really based on voting secretively they are based on exclusion: If I send my kid to the best public schools like the power elite do, I pay for who they don't let in to the school! and for the "right" indoctrination (so to speak). I also use all hierarchical systems for my analysis and these systems are based ultimately on an outside system legitimizing the power structure, not so much the process of democracy. For example, sure we can vote for George Bush but the reason why my neighbor who knows everything or George Bernard Shaw's barber is not on the ballot and chimp looking Bush is not because of anything democratic.

I think that in this case the secret ballots function more for privacy because there is no real hidden society here....I could be wrong, but I wanted to clarify the thinking I use when determining my point of view here. Again I don't think its a gigantic issue but this is transparency for you, it is how I consider this question.

Oh, you still face him, but as a group. The decision becomes a group responsibility rather than an individual responsibility. No one needs to know how any particular individual voted. One only needs to know how the group voted.

If you insist on individual transparency, an individual can then become the target of reprisals by those that disagree with his vote. This undermines the independence and freedom of choice necessary in the voting process. It essentially introduces conflict of interest, which is not beneficial.


That is not an option with the software, as far as I can tell.

agreed. your doing a good job here admin.

ty

ps. how about we show the blue finger of democracy at work? prolly a bad idea.not enough voters here yet for results of a poll to garantee are anonymity.

The first suspension for any member is for 2 days.

Subsequent suspensions are for longer time periods.

I propose the following:

Suspension #1 is for 2 days.
Suspension #2 is for 7 days.
Suspension #3 is for 14 days.
Suspension #4 is permanent.

Objections? Suggestions?

Sounds like a plan, I agree!