to help clarify, this is my first post but I write a lot about various issues to try to help make sense of the complex interrelations that often succumb to bullying forces that only the forceful exercise. that leaves those who aren't forceful to be at their mercy due to neither understanding nor having experience with such force to even defend against it. this post explains that people effectively vote already by their choice to give something their all or to save some for themselves when a prospect looks unpromising to reciprocate adequately. it's only practical, and necessary for survival to discriminate this way. so then that community voted adjustment of location could apply as well to residences as to seating places in school/work cafeterias. the only thing i can see necessary to have in place is a safety net to ensure no unjustified ostracism shuns people for reasons they can't help. certainly there are enough people to include fat people or speech impediment people into their little crowds to eat together with that it's not a big problem. that freedom to include people lest they be saddened by exclusion must be preserved. but i'm just saying that if people start getting arrogant and demanding a seat but just don't have the best way of speaking or are fat or smelly or even just having a bad day that the incumbent residents have a right to vote them out. and they have to sit in general seating since they paid to eat or paid their rent to have a guaranteed room in the hotel etc just not a guaranteed proximity to any particular clique group. groups have unique dues they require be paid.
HOAs could evolve to have a cash out procedure. same with any tax collecting system. it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to keep paying fees or property taxes when you can't cash out due to policies that you didn't choose (new zoning or bad neighbors) having damaged the market for land that is assigned to you for your purchase of a deeded privilege.