An elegantly simple way to evolutionize government

Wikipedia was so stabilizing by itself they needed to introduce a hierarchical system to end the edition wars.

Cant think of the game theory bits this article is supposed to refer but if genuine, it fails harshly with the wikipedia example.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
I think you are missing the point with the wikipedia examples.
All he is suggesting is allowing elected officials to comment on any bill and dynamically shape those comments as the oppositions responds in kind.
Only elected officials could shape these arguments so the edition wars you are referring to would not be a problem unless one side was obviously trying to confuse the issue which thanks to this system would only reveal their duplicity.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
213
Game theory predicts the arguments would quickly stabilize with fewer and fewer changes (like Wikipedia articles) - they wouldn't go on and on in a tit-for-tat fashion.
There's the bit.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
Perhaps not the best example as wikipedia articles never seem to stabilize fully since they are open to anonymous editing by anyone alltho they do see fewer edits over time.
The system he is suggesting is not open to editing by the public, only elected officials trying to defend or promote a position and endless inane bickering would in the end only serve to undermine those positions.
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
213
Back
Top Bottom