This site will have a very extensive voting/polling/survey system, however for the moment there is just limited usage of some capabilities of external sites.

The technology and systems are complex to describe. Even the result is difficult to describe.

There are a couple of sides to this system.

The first is mixing types and grades of votes. So that a single vote may be considered valid or invalid in different contexts. And each vote cast is organized based on criteria, primarily qualification and identification. Qualification can be a large number of things such as location, or certified expertise on a subject. The system is generic enough such that generally wrong forms of discrimination like racism and sexism can be applied. Identification allows everyone to vote, and to do so openly or secretly, and can also be privately shared. Systems allow for verification of secretly cast votes, to insure integrity and eliminate fraud. Specifically, even when completely secretly voting can verify how their vote is recorded, and even allow others to verify their vote without access to it.

This basically results in the ability to view the same question with many different results. So on the same issue or election, it can be viewed how everyone voted, or just the experts in a related field. Or a selected community, group of friends (virtual or real), or other grouping of people. It is also possible to look at how individuals voted, when that is made public, or is shared.

The other side is about auto-casting and changing at will. The point of auto-casting is that it becomes possible to express an opinion on things, without having to directly participate. This is based on the concept that most people form opinions by echoing the opinions of others, or when voting, simply vote based on how others known to the voter are voting. By just making that technically managed, people can make their opinions more powerful. An example would be a friend of mine that definitely has the same clear understanding and position on a number of critical issues. So if something was being voted on, and I am not available to review and decide for myself on the issue, then I would prefer to automatically take what ever his position is.

Then, since the other point is to be able to review all the auto-cast as well as manually cast votes, and change them at anytime. Even if whatever issue has passed, it would be possible to indicate a more enlightened opinion on it. And in a situation where there is a lot of disparity among the lower priority (not-selected) auto-cast votes, these would more indicated as higher priority for review (by default settings, the user can always specifically control such operations).

By the purely generic nature of the systems and ease-of-use, they can be used for voting on huge world-wide important issues, or small personal issues in a group, organization, or bunch of friends.