"Gaming" is the notion that any set of rules can be played for maximum advantage, often in ways that the original game designer didn't intend. This raises the question: how would Interactive Democracy be gamed?
- One way is that the issues to be voted on can be selected or written in such a way as to encourage one outcome.
- Another is to limit the number of choices.
- If several choices are available, a voting system may be offered that is proportional but biased.
- Deadlines for votes may be chosen to coincide with sporting events that drag peoples attention away.
- Wealthy individuals or groups, or the media, may pursue a campaign of persuasion.
- Individuals may bully others into a vote.
In previous posts I have addressed counter measures to some of these issues - the contribution of an elected Parliament, police powers, balancing media power with information on the voting site - but perhaps the best way to prevent abuse is to make the system adaptable enough for voters to change it in response to problems.