I really like the idea of a randomly picked group of folks reviewing the performance or even choosing the chief executive and/or board of a group or even government body or executive! This would probably, as per your suggestion, involve more than one citizen assembly, so that one could pore over applicants, and another could pick the winners, with maybe yet another one deciding how this would all work. I wonder if there are data on whether it would be more effective to choose random candidates or ones based on merit?
The key (again) is to NOT have the panel that REMOVES an executive be the same panel that chooses the replacement, as that is a recipe for corruption (get rid of a decent incumbent so YOU get to fill the position with your friend.) Here is a link to a short article I wrote about using sortition to create a panel that would appoint board members of a co-op (instead of elections). https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/a-better-co-op-democracy-without-elections/2017/04/19
Some feedback on this section: i think it repeats things you already said before in the book too much, to the extent that i checked i didn't accidentally clicked away to a previous section.
Yes, I need a book editor... I repeat many points whenever they seem important to the discussion within an individual post, figuring that many people will only read a few particular posts, rather than trudging through the whole thing.
That actually makes a lot of sense. Once the full book is published it would probably be good to have both the full book which is written for people who read the whole thing and these individual essays meant for people who read only specific parts.
Eager to read the upcoming chapter! 😊
I really like the idea of a randomly picked group of folks reviewing the performance or even choosing the chief executive and/or board of a group or even government body or executive! This would probably, as per your suggestion, involve more than one citizen assembly, so that one could pore over applicants, and another could pick the winners, with maybe yet another one deciding how this would all work. I wonder if there are data on whether it would be more effective to choose random candidates or ones based on merit?
The key (again) is to NOT have the panel that REMOVES an executive be the same panel that chooses the replacement, as that is a recipe for corruption (get rid of a decent incumbent so YOU get to fill the position with your friend.) Here is a link to a short article I wrote about using sortition to create a panel that would appoint board members of a co-op (instead of elections). https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/a-better-co-op-democracy-without-elections/2017/04/19
Some feedback on this section: i think it repeats things you already said before in the book too much, to the extent that i checked i didn't accidentally clicked away to a previous section.
Yes, I need a book editor... I repeat many points whenever they seem important to the discussion within an individual post, figuring that many people will only read a few particular posts, rather than trudging through the whole thing.
That actually makes a lot of sense. Once the full book is published it would probably be good to have both the full book which is written for people who read the whole thing and these individual essays meant for people who read only specific parts.