You yourself say that you cannot sustain any disinformation campaign indefinitely, even if they might be successful for the occassional vote. So, using your own logic these hypothetical disinformation campaigns you’re doing hand wringing over don’t actually matter in the grand scheme of things.
You are making a disingenuous argument that ignores the entire point I made.
Disinformation campaigns do matter if you’re only having occasional votes - you can slip through a bad decision every once in a while. If you vote on everything, then it wouldn’t matter, because you’ll have a vote in review where the flawed vote would be corrected.
The only one making disingenuous arguments here is you bud. Your whole argument is based on a completely unfounded supposition that the current system does not end up fairly representing the will of the public. There is no evidence to suggest anything of the sort that I’m aware of.
Meanwhile, the whole idea of direct democracy that you’re peddling here doesn’t scale beyond small communities. Failing to understand why delegation of concerns is a necessary aspect of any complex organization exposes infantile understanding of the subject you’re attempting to debate.
