There are more reasons, for example that all systems that use online or digital voting can be easily manipulated and lack the possibility to be monitored or validated by independent 3rd parties. I really wish it would be different.
I am a huge fan of direct democracy, but I don’t see a good way to implement it.
Yes, a system like that where you can split your voice based on topics, my personal strengths is with financial and technical topics so those I would vote for myself, and delegate everything else to different people or parties sounds much more practical and useable.
That I would find very interesting and possibly a huge step forward.
Voting on opinions is a very bad idea, because opinions doesn’t have to be backed by facts or reality. I can have the opinion that it should be law that all people should wear green socks on Tuesdays. Should there really be a vote about a opinion like that? If yes, then then floodgates will be open and the system gets overwhelmed with input to vote on. If not, who decides what kind of opinion is valid to vote one, and how can a misuse of that power be prevented.
To do a informed vote on something you should have at least some basic idea what the topic means and a understanding of the implications, benefits and risks of that.
So let’s say 0.001 percent of the people in a country with for example 40 million people in the valide age group have some great ideas that they want to get voted about every year. That would be 400 votes, so more then a votes every day. That means that you either vote blind on lots/most of the topics or do nothing else then to keep up on the needed data to do a informed decision. Even with only 40 votes, so about one vote every ten days, you would be forced to invest a huge part of your time to keep yourself up to date on all topics.
Oh and such a voting system would be extremely easy to manipulate by influencers, celebrities or other people with a high parasocial or charismatic power.
Yeah, I fear that in Star Trek we would be the Mirror Universe.