This seems flawed in a few ways. 1: anarchy does not require full connectivity between metamours, so there's no reason to assume complexity scales this way 2. Hierarchy has more rules, so, while harder to visualize, it's more of a trade-off than a better/worse. Structure is..
Why 'hierarchical polyamory' is better than 'relationship anarchy', illustrated.https://twitter.com/RichRogers_/status/1159872097205805056 …
-
-
-
2/ its own form of complexity. With anarchy, there are less rules to follow, which is arguably simpler than hierarchy. Especially when you factor in the emotional maintenance of people in different levels. If anything, this shows how egalitarian groups do not scale. Thoughts?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Clearly we cannot have a free market as the number of potential trades scales as (n!)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Also, a good argument for having information silos (central nodes), authoritarism, etc.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How's that work, exactly? That could be an interesting video...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Haven't you heard? Hierarchies are evil.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.