Content pfp
Content
@
https://warpcast.com/~/channel/politics
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Vitalik Buterin pfp
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
One of my more radical beliefs is that many more classes of governance actions should be anonymous / secret ballot (eg. I've advocated for secret-ballot UN general assembly votes before) This situation is a good argument for judges' identities being hidden (!!) when they make their rulings. The function of a judge is to rule according to the facts as interpreted through their conscience, not to be "accountable" to violent mobs.
48 replies
149 recasts
828 reactions
Vitalik Buterin pfp
Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
Today this stuff sounds crazy and "why is the crypto bro pushing zk wizard tech solutions to a social problem", but in the 2020s age of easy physical retaliation (including by foreign adversary states), I think we'll see such ideas enter the overton window more.
5 replies
37 recasts
393 reactions
Agost Biro pfp
Agost Biro
@agostbiro
The issue here is not that judges are doxxed. In fact that's healthy in a well-functioning society, because it lets them take part in public life to represent their institution. This attack is a symptom of state capture in the US that won't be solved by anon voting.
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
sparkz pfp
sparkz
@jacy
ummm @purp did you just qcโ€™d by Vitalik?!? ๐Ÿ™Œ๐Ÿ‘Š๐ŸคŸ
1 reply
0 recast
10 reactions
qt pfp
qt
@qt
Judge can only make the ruling anonymously if they're holding more than 2M $ANON
0 reply
0 recast
7 reactions
Patrick Atwater | ๐ŸŒฑ๐Ÿšด3๐ŸŒ pfp
Patrick Atwater | ๐ŸŒฑ๐Ÿšด3๐ŸŒ
@patwater
Hmmmm seems like treating symptoms rather than causes
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Andrew Jiang pfp
Andrew Jiang
@ok
In a world with AI, leaving judgements to human interpretations feels antiquated. Bottlenecks the judicial process and fairness is subjective.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Eric Platon pfp
Eric Platon
@ic
Secret ballot breaks accountability on decision making. We need to detect errors and bias too.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Pau ๐ŸŽฉ โ›“๏ธโ€๐Ÿ’ฅ pfp
Pau ๐ŸŽฉ โ›“๏ธโ€๐Ÿ’ฅ
@p4u
That's exactly why we are building https://davinci.vote
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Icetoad ๐Ÿ• ๐ŸŽฉ ๐Ÿˆ pfp
Icetoad ๐Ÿ• ๐ŸŽฉ ๐Ÿˆ
@icetoad.eth
Trump has been inciting violence against judges his whole term https://www.reuters.com/investigations/these-judges-ruled-against-trump-then-their-families-came-under-attack-2025-05-02/
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Stuart pfp
Stuart
@olystuart
Sure but this is the US we're talking about, if the judges were anon how could the ruling class bribe them? ๐Ÿคทโ€โ™‚๏ธ
0 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
bernieon.base.eth pfp
bernieon.base.eth
@holland
What happened to that judge shows why some level of anonymity can matter. In politics or governance, participants could first vote anonymously, verified with zero-knowledge proofs, on whether a decision itself should be anonymous. If about 60% agree, the final vote would follow the same process, with a clear reason, delayed release, and checks to keep it honest.
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
meryan.base.eth pfp
meryan.base.eth
@meryan
The risks to transparency and long-term systemic health outweigh the benefits, potentially creating a cure worse than the disease. Instead, Iโ€™d advocate for stronger protections within a transparent framework: better security for judges, stricter laws against threats, and perhaps hybrid anonymity in extreme cases.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
ultraboost pfp
ultraboost
@ultraboost
Nice
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Biggydaddy.eth pfp
Biggydaddy.eth
@biggydaddy
Thatโ€™s a really interesting take, anonymity could protect integrity where public pressure distorts justice. Accountability canโ€™t exist if fear governs decisions.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
ihtusand pfp
ihtusand
@ihtusand
Itโ€™s a strong point: transparency isnโ€™t always virtuous. In contexts like judging or UN voting, anonymity can protect integrity by freeing decision-makers from coercion, mob pressure, or political signaling. Accountability should be to law or principle โ€” not to public outrage.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Maarten pfp
Maarten
@mrtn
Yes. I would add: - higher degree of randomness in the assignment of cases (within judgesโ€™ specialty); so a larger pool by more remote judging if a matter doesnโ€™t require local knowledge - a yellow & red card mechanism for poor performers
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mat pfp
Mat
@mat
Would be useful in Mexico where certain appointments can be a death sentence
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Kaxx ๐Ÿฒ๐ŸŽฉ pfp
Kaxx ๐Ÿฒ๐ŸŽฉ
@kaxx
In an ideal world maybe, but this would probably lead to more shady business ๐Ÿ˜ณ
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Keeks pfp
Keeks
@keeks
This means a bit less in systems where the admins can socially or technically enforce techniques to de-anonymize or โ€œproveโ€ a certain vote
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction