The idea of a government based on delegation of authority to the most informed has its roots in antiquity. And although HN may be the first community to actually governed by a philosopher-king, its ability to scale has not been successfully demonstrated.

The problem as I see it, is that believing oneself to be "relatively uninformed" does not make a person relatively uninformed (it may in fact lead them to actively acquire more information - i.e why Severs believes he is below average). Conversely, believing oneself to be well informed does not make one well informed, and may alas lead a person to stop seeking relevant information.

Indeed it would not surprise me if the people most affected by "simpleminded sloganeering" tend to believe they are well informed.

The problem with "people should" in a political context is that it can quickly become "people must" backed with the force of government, and any implementation of: "Informed voting > not voting > uninformed voting" requires disenfranchisement.