<story><title>Knowledge from small number of debates outperforms wisdom of large crowds (2017)</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.00045##</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>amelius</author><text>Perhaps we can save democracy by replacing the voting mechanism by placing people in groups of 10, and letting them reach consensus before making a vote.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>AnthonyMouse</author><text>That was how the US Senate originally operated. You would elect your state legislature (where your vote is &lt;i&gt;much&lt;/i&gt; less diluted than at the federal level) and they would elect your Senator.&lt;p&gt;Early 20th century populism took that away. It also meant that the states now have no representation in the federal legislature, which led to an almost immediate federal takeover of basically everything.</text></comment>
<story><title>Knowledge from small number of debates outperforms wisdom of large crowds (2017)</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.00045##</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>amelius</author><text>Perhaps we can save democracy by replacing the voting mechanism by placing people in groups of 10, and letting them reach consensus before making a vote.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>malodyets</author><text>Iowa has caucuses rather than primaries, and from what I hear from my family, that&amp;#x27;s essentially how the Democratic party caucuses work in Des Moines, Iowa. Rather than filing in and filling out a ballot, my father describes the process as going into a room, forming groups around candidates, and then trying to convince the uncommitted to support your candidate. It always sounded like a rip-roaring good time; now it&amp;#x27;s interesting to learn that this process might produce better results.</text></comment>