[IKE]

I pulled this off of the main thread and put it into the communications thread.

This is in regards to FIRST as a Democracy.

FRC is a Not-for profit. It relies on donations (more so than registration fees). Several mentioned everyone should get a vote. What structure would you propose? Each registered FRC member gets a vote (small teams will have an issue with this)? Each Team gets a vote (large teams can sight that they are investing more towards STEM promotion than the small teams)? Or do you weigh the votes off of Dollars going to FIRST (i know most of us would have issues with that)? I would imagine though that if a proposal got passed that didn't allow sponsors to get recognition (I have heard many FIRSTers get upset by corporate speeches, banners...) the money would dry up quickly.

I haven't heard of a successful democratic process used at a corporation or large not-for-profit. I am not saying they don't exist, I just haven't heard of them. Examples of good functioning large Not-for-Profits would be fantastic. Believe me I wish the big bosses at my company would have done a couple things differently.

As far as elected representatives go. Anybody have a good plan for that? The only elected representatives I get to vote for don't match my views over 50% of the time, and I pay their salary even when they aren't the person I vote for!

***Rant Warning***
I love this country and I think it has a great government structure, but don't kid yourself that we live in a democracy. We live in a Republic. Also don't kid yourself that there are not any back-room deals. Hey you vote on my gun control bill and I will back your oil drilling bill... Hey I have a high unemployment rate in my state, let's build a federal government building in my state, and I will get the state to reduce taxes on the lobbyist companies that backed your election.

A democratic process might be great, but it may require more work than this pilot. Truly democratic processes can also be manipulated too. Talk to any economist and they can explain how election engineering is becoming an increasingly valuable tool for parties.

I think the Pilot was very reasonably formed. I would have liked to have seen it rolled out as a proposal for feedback before being rolled out as a system to be implemented. There is a chance that persons on the inside of this deal may have even thought it was going to go that way. This may be naive on my part.