News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Sortition by notahacker on Monday June 01, 2020 @12:31PM (#23380375)
It'd be even easier, since the decision makers they were attempting to influence wouldn't have any need to worry about the appearance of propriety to secure reelection, and would be less likely to have a pre-existing set of biases.
Re:Sortition by pydry on Monday June 01, 2020 @12:54PM (#23380655)
They're also more likely to lack knowledge on the things lobbyists will attempt to lobby them on.

Already lobbyists try to run "education programs" with representatives as a means of influencing them (which works rather well). That tactic would be a lot more effective if representatives were perpetually lacking in knowledge about relevant issues.

And I'll bet a lot of these randomly selected representatives will choose to be educated by the group that takes them to a fancy dinner and ball game after, or has donated money to their church rather than the one operated by the local chapter of a perpetually underfunded Walmart Union who offer stale cookies.

All of these things can be mitigated with stricter antilobbying laws, but then again, so can our current problems.

I don't see the problem as necessarily being worse with randomly selected representatives, and in some aspects it may work better (randomly selected hippies will tell big corps to take a hike) , but I don't see it as solving the problem structurally.