🚀 go-pugleaf

Snip
> 
> Unfortunately, the system falls down in terms of privacy.  It is all but
> impossible to achieve a secret vote *and* to convince the voters that this
> is the case.
> 
This is correct on both counts.  Then we have the next problem.  Do we 
really want to be ruled by the mob.

A recent maiden speech has caused much controversy of the mob's opinions 
about foreigners.

In times of hardship or trouble, the human response seems to be to turn 
on anyone/anything that is slightly less than exactly identical to the 
local tribe.

Is it the politician's place to fan the flames of this smouldering rage 
or use their position to inject a little calmness and rationality to the 
debate.

If we changed the current representational democracy to direct democracy 
via electronic communication, then there will be nothing to stop the mob 
from using its instant, ill-informed, xenophobic will to the detriment of 
anyone or anything that is slightly unusual.

How many people _still_ maintain that Lindy Chamberlain is 
guilty/innocent without _ever_ having access to the evidence?

Would an instant Supermarket Vote have condemned Lindy to death?

Try to remember that 20 million people who know nothing about a 
particular subject ALL HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT SUBJECT.

The desire of the mob does not equate with rationality or even good 
outcomes for society.