Ideally we would be using Polly, which was made as a critique of Liquid Democracy.
There have been problems implementing it in other countries. I won’t go into specific country by country details because it is based on Pirate Party International discussions years ago and I’m sure the events discussed were disputed by the other participants.
The rate of participation is hugely influential on its effectiveness. If most members aren’t voting regularly and just delegate their votes to other people, the people who control those votes wield immense power over policy. There was a situation in one area where 6 people controlled over 50% of the vote, they realised it and formed a cartel to control the policies of their party. This alienated those who couldn’t influence the voting cartel and damaged the party.
Another issue was that the way the software was implemented created a short turn around time for policy to be debated. This resulted in those with the most time to debate policy having a lot of influence due to being able to invest more time in advocating certain positions.
If we ever get Polly off the ground, or decided to try a version of liquid democracy, we would use it to draft policy that would still be put to the National Congress for debate and approval. This would ensure we don’t end up with a system that doesn’t work in practice controlling the organisation. Once we had run it for a few years and ironed out the bugs we could look at implementing it fully.
Our policy development is done on a long timeline, all members are invited to participate and they are well discussed before Congress is held. This is currently producing excellent policy. The downside is that AndrewD the guy who runs the PDC, is the same guy who was working on Polly and actual policy work is trumping developing the voting system.