Nomic is way too complicated for a toy futarchy. RH suggests that a test system should be a single decision tied to a single conditional market. In particular, he suggests a fire-the-CEO market. You might call “futarchy” any conditional prediction market that is sponsored by (or even just known to) the decision makers. I am not aware of any such examples, but I think most prediction markets are fairly secret, so I would not be terribly surprised if some exist.
By no means. The great thing about complexity is that it can be managed: just break it into pieces and give a piece to each person. With a codenomic, that complexity can be self-managing to an extent.
Something like Wikipedia.
Anyway, futarchy in a codenomic? You can just come up with a simple English description of each possible change and let people “vote” based on it. It’ll go nicely enough.
Given the downvote (parent currently −1) it might be worth pointing out that Warrigal has been an active player in the “best” nomic (which as been running since 1993) in a non-trivial capacity. E appears to have been a historian of Agora as of 2008, and (despite my lack of current knowledge of the nomic community since I stopped playing years and years ago) may well be one of the most experienced and historically knowledgeable “current nomic players” on the planet. On this basis I would weight eir opinion on the matter of “what can be done in a nomic” rather strongly.
As an aside, nomic is super fun, very educational, and quite time consuming. If anyone here is a college student with expectations of a year of on-and-off free time I would recommend joining Agora by reading the rules, signing up for the mailing lists, and having some fun. When you get older, you probably won’t have time for actual playing, but will appreciate the memories :-)
I have been an active player in the past, but I’m not currently; I don’t know when or if I’ll get back into it. I was Agora’s Historian only very briefly before that position was eliminated. My total nomic experience is definitely not more than a couple of years, as I only discovered it recently, and my historical knowledge is only what I’ve witnessed personally and the small amount that I happened to read once.
Are you perhaps thinking of Suber’s original, paper-and-tabletop, Nomic ruleset? The codenomics I’ve seen tend to consist of little other than bare self-amendment (direct democracy, generally). They’re considerably simpler than most natural-language email nomics, which in turn tend to be perhaps strictly more complex than Suber, but also less intimidating in the style of prose.
Fire-the-CEO is no good as an early test system. It may be temptingly simple, but it will never actually be put into practice until after the theory has been fairly well-established, because you don’t trust something important like the CEO to a system that’s still being tested.
A test implementation needs to be a toy system, one that won’t damage anything important if the theory turns out to be wrong. (It wouldn’t need testing if you already knew what would happen.) Hence, a computer game.
Nomic is way too complicated for a toy futarchy. RH suggests that a test system should be a single decision tied to a single conditional market. In particular, he suggests a fire-the-CEO market. You might call “futarchy” any conditional prediction market that is sponsored by (or even just known to) the decision makers. I am not aware of any such examples, but I think most prediction markets are fairly secret, so I would not be terribly surprised if some exist.
By no means. The great thing about complexity is that it can be managed: just break it into pieces and give a piece to each person. With a codenomic, that complexity can be self-managing to an extent.
Something like Wikipedia.
Anyway, futarchy in a codenomic? You can just come up with a simple English description of each possible change and let people “vote” based on it. It’ll go nicely enough.
Given the downvote (parent currently −1) it might be worth pointing out that Warrigal has been an active player in the “best” nomic (which as been running since 1993) in a non-trivial capacity. E appears to have been a historian of Agora as of 2008, and (despite my lack of current knowledge of the nomic community since I stopped playing years and years ago) may well be one of the most experienced and historically knowledgeable “current nomic players” on the planet. On this basis I would weight eir opinion on the matter of “what can be done in a nomic” rather strongly.
As an aside, nomic is super fun, very educational, and quite time consuming. If anyone here is a college student with expectations of a year of on-and-off free time I would recommend joining Agora by reading the rules, signing up for the mailing lists, and having some fun. When you get older, you probably won’t have time for actual playing, but will appreciate the memories :-)
I have been an active player in the past, but I’m not currently; I don’t know when or if I’ll get back into it. I was Agora’s Historian only very briefly before that position was eliminated. My total nomic experience is definitely not more than a couple of years, as I only discovered it recently, and my historical knowledge is only what I’ve witnessed personally and the small amount that I happened to read once.
Are you perhaps thinking of Suber’s original, paper-and-tabletop, Nomic ruleset? The codenomics I’ve seen tend to consist of little other than bare self-amendment (direct democracy, generally). They’re considerably simpler than most natural-language email nomics, which in turn tend to be perhaps strictly more complex than Suber, but also less intimidating in the style of prose.
Fire-the-CEO is no good as an early test system. It may be temptingly simple, but it will never actually be put into practice until after the theory has been fairly well-established, because you don’t trust something important like the CEO to a system that’s still being tested.
A test implementation needs to be a toy system, one that won’t damage anything important if the theory turns out to be wrong. (It wouldn’t need testing if you already knew what would happen.) Hence, a computer game.