Motivation

Nick: I really enjoyed reading this paper. The one thing I wished for was a somewhat more thorough discussion of what fun is (this may not be amenable to a clear-cut definition, but perhaps a brief phenomenology of fun might be doable). Particularly, I wondered what the relationship is between fun and play, fun and affect, fun and neurological markers of pleasure, and fun and irony (as a destabilizing force, particularly as articulated by Paul de Man).

Jason: I am writing on a topic that overlaps heavily with yours. Regarding first generation reforms, what exactly do you mean by turnout? Do laws prohibiting felons from voting not, on your account, affect turnout? What about systematic discrimination by polling workers against black voters (e.g. Florida)? Regarding the effect of mail in elections, is it just more voters in low salience elections and just the same voters in high salience elections? Or is it different voters? Regarding encouraging more voters to join parties, is this confusing causation and correlation? That is, is the fact that they’re independents just an sign that they’re less likely to vote or is it actually a cause? I think it’s worth being concerned about the possibility that trying to boost voting by increasing party loyalty might have unintended consequences on other aspects of democracy (like deliberation). Regarding effect of approbation of voting by publishing names, might this effect be limited to what you describe as low salience elections (where there are a relatively small number of fairly homogenous constituents voting for a representative)?

Erin: I think some of Bernie Harcourt’s data might be interesting to incorporate. See http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/15/opinio…; there’s also a paper on SSRN. One question that I had is how much prisoners are restricted from developing the sort of capabilities described by Deci and Ryan in the status quo. I think that there are ways that prisoners often figure out how to do this (by getting jobs in prison, acquiring legal education and pursing criminal appeals and/or civil lawsuits, and forming, joining and leading gangs come to mind).

Vanessa: I’d like to see a bit more discussion of what it would mean for manhood to not be precarious? Would it be seen as a purely biological phenomenon? Would this be something system design should aim at?