Interesting,
to everyone in this thread. This voting DAC is very interesting. The process of conducting a vote can be mapped across the same problem space as crypto, DACs, etc. It's trust, it's ledgers, it's double-spending, it's transparency, it's auditable records, it's consensus.
I think the reason the philosophy flows in this discussion on voting, is because we're in a problem space that includes much of what it means to operate as a human being. How do you come to fair and honest decisions in a world where every actor has different realities, opinions, values? And really, this question exists inside, outside, and between humans. It exists between groups of humans, it exists in every exchange a human makes. The solution, IMO, is to find ways to unlock the genius of nature, and harness the wisdom of crowds.
I think a lot can be understood by extrapolating out from our biological imperatives. Our nature is directing what we find interesting, pleasurable, exciting, worthy, etc. Our biological machinery rewards us for doing things that help the species. A major reason why people solve problems. Think about it. Someone who writes a DAC, a farmer, an artist, a policeman, a politician, or even a guy who joins a hate group, someone who drills for oil, works at the NSA, etc., are all interpreting how to help the species and getting paid in pleasure by their biological machinery.
The problems being solved here are the same problems that all biological systems have to solve.