Re: Tau-Chain and Agoras Official Thread: Generalized P2P Network
how do you expect people to form well-formed proposals, that actually express what they meant and so on?
do you expect this to be an individual process for experts?
on the new tau we consider this a collaborative process for non-experts, the process of forming a proposal, aside the process of accepting it.
do you expect this to be an individual process for experts?
on the new tau we consider this a collaborative process for non-experts, the process of forming a proposal, aside the process of accepting it.
I think it's wishful thinking to imagine that non-experts will be able to amend the protocol or understand deeply what they are voting for. Tezos's solution apparently is to allow people who don't understand what they are asked to vote for to delegate their votes to someone they believe knows better and shares their perspective. Not a bad idea. At best, you could have experts rephrasing the decision in simpler terms in plain english, but then you would still need to trust that they are not misrepresenting the problem or showing a bias, and you would still need people to really try to understand what they say at a logic level which isn't a given, and then there is the laziness. As pointed in the interview, the DAO was a good example of how in practice, most people won't really bother voting.
a smaller point would be regarding votes. once you take a close look, you don't need them anymore 
Would that be a solipsistic look or a totalitarian look or an omniscient look
?