2010/10/6 Nguyen Vu Hung <vuhung16p...@gmail.com> > > > IMHO, democracy is better than others ways election. But how to make a > > choice is difficult. > > > > > Sophie has mention meritocracy and I think it is better than democracy. > > I don't think that meritocracy is better that democracy but it isn't worst, meritocracy have the problem of how we weight the merits of the person and the democracy have the problem of people manipulation. I'm going to think in a mix system of the two and propose it but basically is going to consist of:
First two observers are selected to review the process and rollback if they are problems. Second the election of 10 people, this people are reviewers, can't know the identities of the others, only can communicate with others with a especial email/im and can't be candidates. Third the presentation of the candidates. Fourth the reviewer evaluates the candidates and validate their participation o reject it, based in merits and/or other things. Fifth the elections. After this the elected people can be reviewed by popular petition and then the reviewers can force a demotion process or reelections, but the reviewers don't have power to make decisions of their own if the decision is not asked by the community or the elected people. Also they can inform to the community how good the elected people are and their merits during the legislature. -- To unsubscribe, send an empty e-mail to discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org All messages you send to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted. List archives are available at http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
