Are you going to be the arbiter of this process? Will you handle the grading of “how progressive and feasible their plans are”? Are you affiliated with BLM or The Proud Boys? Am I somewhat naive about how practical (or not) this sounds? I congratulate and respect you for your good intentions but, as I hope I made clear, this sounds like a task for the Politburo or CCP in China.
- I could not be the sole arbiter of this process.
- I would not handle the grading of the plans. That would be outsourced to people with relevant expertise in the fields in question. There would also be graders of overall applications, but I’ve yet to work out how the weight of someone’s expertise might be decided. Moreover, and if this wasn’t made clear in the post, weight would be placed in favor of solutions to the problems that we’ve all voted to be important.
- I am not affiliated with either of those organizations in any way.
- And if you are a reasonable, sober-minded person, this should all sound next to impossible to implement. But my goal here wasn’t to design something that could be easily done. I wanted to design a system that, if implemented, would be radically more conducive to solving actual issues than our current way of doing things is, and I think that I’ve actually come reasonably close to achieving that goal.
And it’s important to note that each step in this process has been designed to be as transparent as possible. Since people would be able to view all applications, if the public doesn’t like what plans are getting selected, they can simply organize to get other plans chosen.
Well said! Thank you for the clarification.
Might be a fun algorithm to try to create.