In your narrative of videos on RxC and Plurality Institute YouTube channels, we have ships and boats with vectors and ropes. I am very much interested in smaller marginalized people but in diverse groups where each cluster is too small and too remote, but putting those clusters together may compose a sizeable number of people that is sufficiently large to address the pains of those people.
In ships and boats illustration, boats that are in different groups may have smaller arrows of vectors, but may point to the same direction. This is a hypothetical situation, but the situation can be realistic if polarization ever flourishes and society has fewer ways to bridge those. Those potentially common interests across less correlated groups may arise from many places within intersectional connections in problem space might be not as visible or not as articulated (as it is challenging to align the expressions for the similar wishes). Is there anything that combines similar thoughts across coordinates that are far across each other (and that are phrased in context and vary a lot)?
In your example of MPT (democratically efficient frontier ; ), the mixture of social groups will be designed to factor to discount the influence and in order to amplify smaller groups. The current aimed design seems to assume that the number of people in social groups outnumber the smaller groups under certain criteria or beliefs, which makes it necessary to discount the impact of larger groups.
If factoring is performed accordingly to the values, would it be a scenario that the larger group voices are not content with discounted quadratically valued wishes? How could the grouping be balanced between discounting and amplifying.