On 02/05/2011 23:18, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 02 May 2011 22:41:07 +0100, Old Codger wrote:

I cannot believe that most folk would normally find any of the
alternatives acceptable and certainly not below a second choice.

So you only rank those that you find acceptable from none, (spoil
your paper), to all or any number in between. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RANK
THEM ALL.

So folk keep saying, and I do believe it to be true. But all the
propaganda, for and against, emphasises ranking all the candidates.
That means folk will rank candidates they would not vote for.

--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

On 03/05/2011 21:11, Old Codger wrote:
On 02/05/2011 23:18, Dave Liquorice wrote:


So you only rank those that you find acceptable from none, (spoil
your paper), to all or any number in between. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RANK
THEM ALL.

So folk keep saying, and I do believe it to be true. But all the
propaganda, for and against, emphasises ranking all the candidates. That
means folk will rank candidates they would not vote for.


Hopefully, if AV is adopted, some better education will be available
before we actually have to *do* it!
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On 03/05/2011 23:37, Roger Mills wrote:
On 03/05/2011 21:11, Old Codger wrote:
On 02/05/2011 23:18, Dave Liquorice wrote:


So you only rank those that you find acceptable from none, (spoil
your paper), to all or any number in between. YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RANK
THEM ALL.

So folk keep saying, and I do believe it to be true. But all the
propaganda, for and against, emphasises ranking all the candidates. That
means folk will rank candidates they would not vote for.


Hopefully, if AV is adopted, some better education will be available
before we actually have to *do* it!

Ever the optimist aren't you. Remember we are dealing with politicians.
:-)

--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

Old Codger wrote:
Hopefully, if AV is adopted, some better education will be available
before we actually have to *do* it!

Ever the optimist aren't you. *Remember we are dealing with politicians..

....and voters. I've had people saying:
- they don't want to vote for Nick Clegg - well, ok, he's not a
candidate
anywhere in the country, go ahead
- people saying "can I just go to any polling station, then?"
- "I'm going to vote Labour (in the council election), 'cos they'll
get
rid of student fees and give ForgeMasters £80m"
- "I'm going to keep voting Labour as /hard/ /as/ /I/ /can/ until
they become real socialists and nationalise everything".

The problem with democracy is while anybody can vote, anybody can
vote.

JGH

jgharston wrote:


The problem with democracy is while anybody can vote, anybody can
vote.

As much as I'd like ban the lazy and stupid from voting, that would kind of
make me Hilter (did I just I Godwin myself?).

So the only real long term answer is education - tough, to the point,
encouraging critical thinking. Even then it could take a couple of
generations to see any improvement.

Mind you, one Hilter-y thing I might do is limit TV broadcasting severely -
and reduce the opportunities for people to vegetate.



--
Tim Watts

In message , Tim Watts
writes
j


So the only real long term answer is education -

Would that be Tony BLiar's form or 'education, education, education'?


--
Ian

On 05/05/2011 in message Tim Watts
wrote:

As much as I'd like ban the lazy and stupid from voting, that would kind of
make me Hilter (did I just I Godwin myself?).

Don't ban them, just give more votes to people who are better educated,
have got off their arses to get on in the world and have stayed out of
trouble.

Nevil Shute's "The Seventh Vote" provides a template.

--
Jeff Gaines Wiltshire UK
There are 10 types of people in the world, those who do binary and those
who don't.

On Thu, 05 May 2011 08:27:15 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

jgharston wrote:


The problem with democracy is while anybody can vote, anybody can
vote.

As much as I'd like ban the lazy and stupid from voting, that would kind of
make me Hilter (did I just I Godwin myself?).

So the only real long term answer is education - tough, to the point,
encouraging critical thinking. Even then it could take a couple of
generations to see any improvement.

+1

The AV campaigns have really showed the poor state of education if you
look at all the rubbish that people still believe.

There was a letter, written by one of the local councillors here,
claiming that AV would result in several rounds of voting. It's
really concerning that a councillor would be this ignorant.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On 5 May 2011 08:41:13 GMT, "Jeff Gaines"
wrote:

On 05/05/2011 in message Tim Watts
wrote:

As much as I'd like ban the lazy and stupid from voting, that would kind of
make me Hilter (did I just I Godwin myself?).

Don't ban them, just give more votes to people who are better educated,
have got off their arses to get on in the world and have stayed out of
trouble.

I can see merit of this in theory but in practise this would favour
the rich since they can afford the "best" education.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

John Rumm wrote:

On 05/05/2011 08:27, Tim Watts wrote:
jgharston wrote:


The problem with democracy is while anybody can vote, anybody can
vote.

As much as I'd like ban the lazy and stupid from voting, that would kind
of make me Hilter (did I just I Godwin myself?).

So the only real long term answer is education - tough, to the point,
encouraging critical thinking. Even then it could take a couple of
generations to see any improvement.

But, what when you do that, the educated people with access to the same
information as you draw a different set of conclusions? Or even come to
the same conclusion but still vote differently because the implications
of those conclusions are not the same for all?

You might be able to educate a Turkey as to what the celebration of
Christmas is all about, that does not mean its going to vote for it even
if it does understand every nuance!


This is a fair point.

But I would sleep easier with how the country was being run, even if not to
my personal tastes, if I knew that people had all voted to the best of their
abilities and with a reasonable amount of interest and thinking applied.

eg - it is easy for loads of people to start being persuaded that the BNP
might be a good idea because it will make Britain strong and independent
(whatever).

But if some of the same people remember they have a mate called Ahmed or
Sandip or Chen they might actually be able to reason out why the BNP would
be a bad idea, even if the emotive arguments put out seem attractive - after
all, Hilter won elections on feelgood and "identity" and look where that
ended up.

It's the number of people who base their entire thinking on "what their Pa
did" or "What the Sun says" that do the system no good.

Look at Part P, to bring it closer to home: the "think of the children"
style of emotive justification won over a lot of people who couldn't be less
interested in actually understanding the real issues (eg actual recorded
death rates due to fixed installations).

Now, if we had Part P but I could ask any random people what they thought,
and 50% or more said they understood the risk from electrics were less than
crossing the road and that it was a good way to "manage" electricians for
tax purposes - BUT - they still thought it was a good thing - then I could
live with that.

It's crap happening and no-one gives a ******** that bugs me.

Cheers

Tim

--
Tim Watts

On Thu, 05 May 2011 16:57:29 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 05/05/2011 10:08, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 05 May 2011 08:27:15 +0100, Tim wrote:

jgharston wrote:


The problem with democracy is while anybody can vote, anybody can
vote.

As much as I'd like ban the lazy and stupid from voting, that would kind of
make me Hilter (did I just I Godwin myself?).

So the only real long term answer is education - tough, to the point,
encouraging critical thinking. Even then it could take a couple of
generations to see any improvement.

+1

The AV campaigns have really showed the poor state of education if you
look at all the rubbish that people still believe.

There was a letter, written by one of the local councillors here,
claiming that AV would result in several rounds of voting. It's
really concerning that a councillor would be this ignorant.

Who says he believes it? He might just calculate that a fair number of
his readers might!

Indeed. The thought did occur to me especially given the date the
letter was printed (Wednesday).
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Thu, 05 May 2011 19:24:39 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:

John Rumm wrote:

On 05/05/2011 08:27, Tim Watts wrote:
jgharston wrote:


The problem with democracy is while anybody can vote, anybody can
vote.

As much as I'd like ban the lazy and stupid from voting, that would kind
of make me Hilter (did I just I Godwin myself?).

So the only real long term answer is education - tough, to the point,
encouraging critical thinking. Even then it could take a couple of
generations to see any improvement.

But, what when you do that, the educated people with access to the same
information as you draw a different set of conclusions? Or even come to
the same conclusion but still vote differently because the implications
of those conclusions are not the same for all?

You might be able to educate a Turkey as to what the celebration of
Christmas is all about, that does not mean its going to vote for it even
if it does understand every nuance!


This is a fair point.

But I would sleep easier with how the country was being run, even if not to
my personal tastes, if I knew that people had all voted to the best of their
abilities and with a reasonable amount of interest and thinking applied.

eg - it is easy for loads of people to start being persuaded that the BNP
might be a good idea because it will make Britain strong and independent
(whatever).

But if some of the same people remember they have a mate called Ahmed or
Sandip or Chen they might actually be able to reason out why the BNP would
be a bad idea, even if the emotive arguments put out seem attractive - after
all, Hilter won elections on feelgood and "identity" and look where that
ended up.

It's the number of people who base their entire thinking on "what their Pa
did" or "What the Sun says" that do the system no good.

Look at Part P, to bring it closer to home: the "think of the children"
style of emotive justification won over a lot of people who couldn't be less
interested in actually understanding the real issues (eg actual recorded
death rates due to fixed installations).

Now, if we had Part P but I could ask any random people what they thought,
and 50% or more said they understood the risk from electrics were less than
crossing the road and that it was a good way to "manage" electricians for
tax purposes - BUT - they still thought it was a good thing - then I could
live with that.

It's crap happening and no-one gives a ******** that bugs me.

Well said. The problem with a democracy is that we get* what people
want rather than what people need. However it's the best we have
right now.

To improve matters we need a better educated electorate and better
educated politicians. The latter need to understand the real world
outside public school, oxbridge and westminster.

* Subject to the electoral system giving them what they want.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.