<<Yuyutsu, it may be technically possible for millions of people to vote on everything.
But you don't want people to tire of direct democracy.

Too many votes too often and people will be begging for “representatives” again, and we're back to Tweedletown.
That's why I think a smaller (but still significant) random vote is better.>>

There is nothing to prevent you enjoying both worlds:

Every citizen may assign any other citizen as their proxy, obviously someone they generally trust and respect, then if one does not vote by the deadline, their vote is counted as their proxy's. Obviously the proxy too can have their own proxy, etc. and of course one can change proxies at any time (or choose to have none).

They were the “right wing” of the LEFT.
Shockadelic,
That's one of the better descriptions of the National Sozialisten or Labor in English.

"..but I can assure you there is a negative financial incentive in my case.
vs
...hope to get AEC tax deductible status when we reach 500 members
Roger Brisbane,
That's the standard Eh ?
Posted by individual, Tuesday, 29 January 2013 9:57:22 PM"

A quick tax lesson for individual's sake:
When a donation is made to an AEC registered party, or a charity, there is a corresponding reduction in taxable income.

Ie: if I donate $1,500 (the max. Amount that can attract a deduction in the case of political parties) and my marginal tax rate is 33.33% (for ease), then my taxable income is $1,500 less. Ie, I pay $500 less tax than I would have otherwise, whilst still incurring a $1,000 cost.

There is no financial benefit, only cost.

Paul1405, I don't deny Take It Off is “extreme” or “right”.
It's fairly obvious it is “right”. And proposes some very radical changes.
But it is truly “Rightist”.
The fascists/Nazis were actually LEFTISTS.
They were the “right wing” of the LEFT. (right oh! sort of ambidextrous people. I can think of a few words to describe the likes of Hitler, but ambidextrous was not the first word that sprung to mind.)

Shockadelic, I am sure you do not know your right from your left, you seem to be getting into a bit of a twist from your statement above. Your whole concept is an unworkable load of nonsense. No matter how you dress it up, bend it, fold it, no matter how you twist it, at the end of the day its just another form of fascism. Put in power the mumbo jumbo would soon be replaced by the storm troopers.
A couple of questions;
Besides you, how many members do you have? I like the way you refer to yourself as a political party, 500 members yet?
What does the red symbol at the top of your page represent? Looks rather corn ball to me, but then again no self respecting fascist 'party' would be caught dead without a corn ball symbol for the army of troglodytes to rally around. No I will not be joining any time soon, I would hate to see your party numbers double, besides it would only lend encouragement, and we don't want that.

Josephus asked:
"Please identify the medical and financial benefits that a man and woman have in a marriage that cannot be identified in a contract?"

Source: http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/faqs/the-legal-benefits-that-come-with-marriage/

"Married partners have immediate access to all relationship entitlements, protections and responsibilities.

This contrasts to de facto couples who must live together for a certain period before they are deemed to have legal rights.

A marriage certificate also allows married partners to easily prove their legal rights if challenged, for example in emergency situations. The capacity to quickly and easily prove one’s relationship status is particularly important for same-sex partners because prejudice against same-sex relationships can mean legal rights are denied.

Another practical benefit of marriage is that it is a widely recognised legal relationship. The criteria for establishing de facto status, and the rights ascribed to de facto partners, are different between the Australian states and between Australia and other nations."

...this applies to succession laws, superannuation, and things like ability to make decisions if your married partner is on life support or similar.