If a person is never heard, how would he get popular in the first place?
Rather than give time to a speaker, take time away because of disagreement, not because of a speaker but because of a policy point that the user resonates with, but the speaker does not?
Three small thoughts:
1. For the words spoken vs polling average graph, if there are more data points, draw an L shaped graph similar to the data. reasoning: to see the minimum effective dose of communication. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_curve https://en.chessbase.com/post/do-chess-players-and-scientists-need-intelligence
2. In the graph it is only for the more verbal tilted party. Imagine a similar graph but for the performance tilted party, there might be a divergence. reasoning: differences in discipline are tied to social affiliation. https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/2020/05/the-verbal-tilt-model/ https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/2022/04/iqs-by-university-degrees/
3. Does intelligibility change the situation of "just talk more"? Short and easy vs long and jargon? https://kottke.org/14/10/the-reading-level-of-presidential-speeches
On making democracy work better, consider Swiss-style governance: https://250bpm.com/blog:161/.
It seems to work because the majority of citizens are well-versed in consensus decisionmaking because lots of people run clubs and associations
If a person is never heard, how would he get popular in the first place?
Rather than give time to a speaker, take time away because of disagreement, not because of a speaker but because of a policy point that the user resonates with, but the speaker does not?