On 09/06/2016 22:11, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 09 Jun 2016 13:25:25 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , T i m
wrote:

[snip]

But I'm not 'not bothering', I will bother to attend my local polling
station, offer up my card, take my paper, go into the booth and write
'SPOILED' across it, so that if anyone does read it they will realise
that it was spoiled intentionally, I didn't just make a mistake (by
putting a cross in both or neither etc).

So, I could ask my local councilor (that I didn't vote in for the same
reasons (I spoiled my paper)) to propose a change in the voting system
where you are obliged to answer correctly 10 simple political
questions and if you don't get them right you aren't allowed to vote
because you wouldn't have shown sufficient 'sills' in the subject
matter. Exactly the same way they hand out driving licences or nearly
any other indication that you are 'worthy' of such status.

That would be your MP, not your local councillor. Parliament has to
legislate to change the way we vote, which will be defined in the
various Representation of the People Acts (part of the British
Constitution).


Yeah, and that. ;-)

My point still stands ... we don't normally let untrained people make
important decisions,

although we "let" them be parents...

we expect them to have at least a rough idea what
is going on or ideally be 'skilled'. But for them to be able to get
even that 'rough idea' they have to be given, or have access to, the
real facts.

Even once they have the facts, they then need to skills, the
intellect, the time, and interest to see / understand the 'bigger
picture' and predict how their decision may impact not only
themselves, but their family, company, town, country or wider still.

The paralysis of analysis...

It can be one of the hardest things to come to terms with if you are a
"detail" person. There are times where "no decision" is a decision, so
you just need to go with your best guess, a hunch, instinct etc.

I for one don't have such information and therefore have no ability to
make a judgment re what would be considered best by anyone able to
fully judge what is the best. I don't know anyone who does and those
who may get close, don't seem to have been highlighted by anyone as
yet?

Alternatively vote for the option you think will do you least harm ;-)

So, I believe what actually happens is people (often a minority who
bother to make their mark) pick up on one topic and use that to
justify their decision (as is their right).

Not really incisive decision making though eh? ;-(

Well its a personality thing as much as anything else. Some people find
it easy to make decisions faced with incomplete and possibly erroneous
data - they also tend to be good at not dwelling on the results and
living with whatever outcome they get.


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/