Again, the groups might not be real. It’s unclear what the groups represent. This might be a flaw that is endemic to this approach, or it could be fixed in some way.
There’s more:
Instead of naively embedding preferences and creating the groups, you can “take actions that encourage grouping along an existing structure or ontology”. If done correctly, the consequent content might be more useful and even more truthful.
I think this system like most approaches, requires high quality interpretation. One implication is that this probably puts pressure on or cuts out a niche for “punditry”. This can be good or bad.
All voting in some sense flattens complex issues into a simple, literally one dimensional axis. Because it builds on voting, Polis can’t completely escape this issue, but tries to alleviate them by interrogating the space with more questions. Doing this runs into other issues, e.g. curse of dimensionality. I think this is why question design and UX choices are deceptively important.
Implementation involves other sensitivities/issues (e.g. flavors of panopticon a la Bentham, Foucault or something). It will be interesting to talk to some informed people about this.
Again, the groups might not be real. It’s unclear what the groups represent. This might be a flaw that is endemic to this approach, or it could be fixed in some way.
There’s more:
Instead of naively embedding preferences and creating the groups, you can “take actions that encourage grouping along an existing structure or ontology”. If done correctly, the consequent content might be more useful and even more truthful.
I think this system like most approaches, requires high quality interpretation. One implication is that this probably puts pressure on or cuts out a niche for “punditry”. This can be good or bad.
All voting in some sense flattens complex issues into a simple, literally one dimensional axis. Because it builds on voting, Polis can’t completely escape this issue, but tries to alleviate them by interrogating the space with more questions. Doing this runs into other issues, e.g. curse of dimensionality. I think this is why question design and UX choices are deceptively important.
Implementation involves other sensitivities/issues (e.g. flavors of panopticon a la Bentham, Foucault or something). It will be interesting to talk to some informed people about this.