On 21/04/2021 22:24, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 21:39:57 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/04/2021 13:20, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 12:22:06 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 21/04/2021 12:01, John Rumm wrote:
On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:

With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

I have never really understood why people do that[1] Is it the belief
that it sends some kind of message?


It may send a message.

Quite and they are counted so have a tangible 'value' as such (even
though the number may be very low in most cases). Now, if *enough*
people understood that that was a formal option and did the same
*maybe* the system could be changed to better reflect what the very
people it was supposed to represent might want?

What "better" system do you propose?

One that allows for people to formally express their apathy for the
status quo for one.

How is that useful?

If I were a candidate, and the message you passed back to me was "meh,
not interested, can't be bothered", it's hardly actionable information
is it?

ISTM an election is not the time to bitch about the electoral system.

Lobby your elected representatives with a proposal of a "better" system,
and generate enough public sympathy for it, then you might get the
opportunity to vote new legislation for the way the system itself works.

I asked this question in this thread because I *do* care about
democracy and that starts with the very people who have *put
themselves up* to represent us.

Stand for election then :-)

And why would I do that! I appreciate in your world of black and
white, that would be the only other option. ;-)

See, like (I suspect) the majority, I *really* don't know enough about
it (at any level) to make a truly informed decision and until
something happens that means I need to learn more, I'll keep my head
in the sand, just like most people do re animal cruelty and
exploitation etc.

As it was once said laws and sausages, to retain respect for them, it's
best to not see too closely how they are made.

(actually I have seen how both are made, and find the process resulting
in chipolatas far less ugly and unsettling!)

ISTM you are setting yourself a set of tests that need to be met before
you are prepared to participate. However as it often the case, there is
no possibility that the tests could ever be satisfied. Therefore you
justify your inaction.

The reality is that no one will ever be "truly informed" or "know
enough". So they have to go with gut feeling, or balance of
probabilities, or historical perspective (i.e. candidate X is majoring
on policy Y... has that been attempted in the past? How did it work out
then? Are enough factors still the same that the same outcome is likely?
Do I want that outcome?).

If it can work (and be perfectly normal / acceptable) for that,

it seems unlikely that it can...

logical consistency says it should equally be valid for politics (and
religion etc).

Frequently the same thing - both are heavily influenced by a belief system.


--
Cheers,

John.

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

"T i m" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 12:01:54 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:

With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

I have never really understood why people do that[1]

Really? I thought 'ethics' were your thing?

Is it the belief
that it sends some kind of message?

It's not a belief it's a fact (because spoiled papers *are* actually
counted).

But irrespective of that, if you don't use something you can lose it so
...

Mindlessly silly as always with your mindless silly ****.

reams of your even sillier **** flushed where it belongs

"Dave W" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:25:56 +0100, T i m wrote:


I didn't say I drew anything on my paper (and certainly nothing that
would perk your obvious penis interest), I said I 'spoiled it' and I
normally do so simply by writing 'NOTA' underneath.

What does 'NOTA' mean?

None of the above.

On 21/04/2021 22:56, Fredxx wrote:
On 21/04/2021 22:24, T i m wrote:

See, like (I suspect) the majority, I *really* don't know enough about
it (at any level) to make a truly informed decision and until
something happens that means I need to learn more, I'll keep my head
in the sand, just like most people do re animal cruelty and
exploitation etc.

Sounds like laziness and consequential fire-fighting to me. The point of
democracy is to empower the people. Obviously democracy is wasted on the
likes of those who actively propose to spoil their paper who are too
idle or too thick to research the issues at hand.

ISTM that T i m is at least being consistent here, in both the microcosm
and the macrocosm. The former represents his approach to local elections
and the latter to the EU Referendum.

The consistency between these lies in in his "Don't know enough" trope
that he uses to justify his inaction in taking part the voting process.
I don't know how long he has lived in the area in which he now resides,
but he has clearly made no effort to follow local affairs. Regarding the
EU Referendum, it is obvious to all that he lived in the EU for 43 years
and then claimed insufficient knowledge of it. Since no-one at all knows
everything at local or international levels - how could they? - it is
clear that T i m has invented a mechanism that suits him as it results
in him doing nothing except whinge about 'the system'. With such a
self-fulfilling prophecy in place, perhaps he would be more suited to
life in a monastery rather that the real world,

If it can work (and be perfectly normal / acceptable) for that,
logical consistency says it should equally be valid for politics (and
religion etc).

When you mention logic and religion in the same sentence you really have
lost the plot.

Quite.


--
Spike

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:51:46 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the useless trolling senile pest's latest troll**** unread

--
Sqwertz to Rodent Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:29:43 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


What does 'NOTA' mean?

None of the above.

Someone provided the answer already two hours before you, senile swine!!!

Just what in hell makes you believe anyone's answer will only be valid when
YOU sociopathic cretin confirm it?

--
Richard addressing senile Rodent Speed:
"**** you're thick/pathetic excuse for a troll."
MID:

On 20/04/2021 20:47, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:25:41 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

well why not simply not bother to vote. They really couldn't care
less about the people who do that.

Unfortunately wouldn't understand even if I tried to explain it to
you. ;-(

The problem with spoiling your vote is that they are not compelled to
report a high number of spoiled ballot papers. They are compelled to
report an insanely low turnout. This outcome seems to be extremely
likely in my neck of the woods since the only thing we get to vote on
this time is the stupid political appointee police commissioner.

The last one was so inept that even her own party disowned her.

Parliament in the process of nuking NY councils by "unitarisation".

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

In article ,
Martin Brown wrote:
On 20/04/2021 20:47, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:25:41 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

well why not simply not bother to vote. They really couldn't care
less about the people who do that.

Unfortunately wouldn't understand even if I tried to explain it to
you. ;-(

The problem with spoiling your vote is that they are not compelled to
report a high number of spoiled ballot papers. They are compelled to
report an insanely low turnout. This outcome seems to be extremely
likely in my neck of the woods since the only thing we get to vote on
this time is the stupid political appointee police commissioner.

we have (in Surrey) an independant PCC. He is seeking re-elction.

The last one was so inept that even her own party disowned her.

Parliament in the process of nuking NY councils by "unitarisation".

NY ?

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 00:14:05 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

What "better" system do you propose?

One that allows for people to formally express their apathy for the
status quo for one.

How is that useful?

Because it would indicate to those looking to manage the world *FOR
US* that we aren't happy with the way it's being done?

If I were a candidate, and the message you passed back to me was "meh,
not interested, can't be bothered", it's hardly actionable information
is it?

Then you come up with a system that's more inclusive. ;-)

ISTM an election is not the time to bitch about the electoral system.

I didn't suggest it was but you have to start somewhere.

If you were looking to market a new product and you handed out mini
survey forms and one of the options was 'Meh', then I know that would
be a perfectly valid, interesting and useful response and have them
re-thinking how they might present / advertise / do the thing
differently.

See, if you use turnout measurement as an indicator of electorate
engagement will only give you a measure of potential apathy. Give them
a 'NOTA' then they will have 'bothered to turn up and vote' and maybe
then do some polls and create some other question for people to vote
on.

And in this day and age there is no reason that sort of thing could be
done electronically.

Lobby your elected representatives with a proposal of a "better" system,
and generate enough public sympathy for it, then you might get the
opportunity to vote new legislation for the way the system itself works.

Lobby the people who in many cases are there for themselves to do
something different and how much public sympathy do you think you will
get to 1) something new and 2) that they aren't generally interested
in in the first place?

The point being that there is a *massive* difference between trying to
vote out a despot in Africa when you actually stand a real chance of
getting a machete across your neck if you try to vote and being
'upset' by them painting the town hall a different colour.

Q. What percentage of those who actually turn up to vote in elections
in the UK.

a) Are actually fully aware of all aspects surrounding their
'decision'.

b) Voting because they 'should' and doing what they have always done
or toss a coin or vote on some trivial (ITRW) point?

And this is when the 'wrong' choice could make matters worse for the
majority for the next 4 years?

snip

See, like (I suspect) the majority, I *really* don't know enough about
it (at any level) to make a truly informed decision and until
something happens that means I need to learn more, I'll keep my head
in the sand, just like most people do re animal cruelty and
exploitation etc.

As it was once said laws and sausages, to retain respect for them, it's
best to not see too closely how they are made.

Quite. ;-)

(actually I have seen how both are made, and find the process resulting
in chipolatas far less ugly and unsettling!)

Well, I can't ever see a world where I could agree but ... ;-)

ISTM you are setting yourself a set of tests that need to be met before
you are prepared to participate.

1) I think we all should.
2) There should be some before any of us should be allowed to.

If you have to take a test to demonstrate competence to drive a car,
or become a Nurse, or even be a nail stylist, why wouldn't you need to
do the same to be allowed to make decisions that could impact
everyone?

However as it often the case, there is
no possibility that the tests could ever be satisfied. Therefore you
justify your inaction.

It's funny how we *can* be tested for most things though, including if
we know enough about the country we hope to live in before we are
allowed in (or even visit on holiday, if the Customs shows on TV are
to be believed)?

The reality is that no one will ever be "truly informed" or "know
enough".

Check.

So they have to go with gut feeling, or balance of
probabilities, or historical perspective (i.e. candidate X is majoring
on policy Y... has that been attempted in the past? How did it work out
then? Are enough factors still the same that the same outcome is likely?
Do I want that outcome?).

Much of which relies on having an interest in the first place, even
for a gut feeling. Anything else is just a lucky dip.

If it can work (and be perfectly normal / acceptable) for that,

it seems unlikely that it can...

logical consistency says it should equally be valid for politics (and
religion etc).

Frequently the same thing - both are heavily influenced by a belief system.

Quite ... and politics shouldn't really be and there is a good chance
it will continue to be with the current 'system'.

An analogy if I may. When my mate wanted a 3D printer he knew he
didn't have the skillset required to achieve his goal so he asked me
if I was willing to be part of it.

He asked me because, he knew I was reasonably good with 'engineering',
conceptual design, electronics, electrics, was already familiar with
the Arduino micro controllers and RC modeling and so was in a way
better chance of getting something going than him.

He asked me because he knew I would be a good person to help, he
didn't ask anyone else because the odds of them having that skillset
would be very low. He wouldn't ask me about football, plants,
religion, astronomy, politics, finances or medical stuff because he
knows I have little idea (because I'm 'not interested').

Whilst 'politics' is something we are all involved in (like it or
not), not everyone has the mindset to be able to find, consider and
make a considered / logical / fair judgment ... and worse, the more
they look the less likely they are to be sure what the right decision
might be for any given scenario.

If you have already made up your mind or have 'a plan' yourself, then
I guess you could discard many options like the game of 'Guess Who'.
;-)

I'm sure that is how many people 'decide' how to vote.

Are they black ... flap flap flap
Are they a fit woman ... "
Do they support my football team ... "
Do they promise me free stuff ... "

Ah, so, apparently I'm going to vote for ...


Cheers, T i m

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 23:15:23 +0100, Dave W
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:25:56 +0100, T i m wrote:


I didn't say I drew anything on my paper (and certainly nothing that
would perk your obvious penis interest), I said I 'spoiled it' and I
normally do so simply by writing 'NOTA' underneath.

Cheers, T i m

What does 'NOTA' mean?

And you think I'm 'bonkers' ...

Cheers, T i m

On 22/04/2021 09:31, Martin Brown wrote:
On 20/04/2021 20:47, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:25:41 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

well why not simply not bother to vote. They really couldn't care
less about the people who do that.

Unfortunately wouldn't understand even if I tried to explain it to
you. ;-(

The problem with spoiling your vote is that they are not compelled to
report a high number of spoiled ballot papers.

Returning officers must by law draw up a statement showing the number of
ballot papers rejected (under several heads).


--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 21 Apr 2021 23:06:22 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 22:24:31 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

On 21 Apr 2021 at 23:15:23 BST, Dave W wrote:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:25:56 +0100, T i m wrote:


I didn't say I drew anything on my paper (and certainly nothing that
would perk your obvious penis interest), I said I 'spoiled it' and I
normally do so simply by writing 'NOTA' underneath.

Cheers, T i m

What does 'NOTA' mean?

None of the above.

Our student union always had an additional candidate named RON.

Re-Open Nominations.

And why not. ;-)

In many cases the 'first option' isn't the best one.

I can remember suggesting we (I) fit a LAN in our company building as
we were a datacomms equipment manufacturer / provider!

The MD agreed and asked me to get some figures together. I hit him
with what I thought was a reasonable price for a starting bundle but
he asked me if I could get a better deal somehow. So I went away,
worked a bit hard and came back with 'a better deal' and he signed it
off.

I'm not sure if it was the actual figure he was playing with, or just
ensuring I had put sufficient effort in to getting the best price.

So, you put yourself up as a local councilor and get voted in by 17%
of the electorate for that ward ... do you think you now represent the
majority of that ward?

Now, I know the whole 'try harder and give it another go' thing does
happen with some prospective councilors but many also chuck it in as
'it wasn't to be' (potentially suggesting just how little their
commitment was to it in the first place).

Cheers, T i m

Mine is further than that away, but the problem really is from what I see,
the proliferation of parties and independents standing these days, We have
animal welfare, Christian parties, Rejoin the eu parties UKIP and Monster
Raving Loony who are putting up 13 candidates in one ward near me.
Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"T i m" wrote in message
...
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]
but I got a call from a representative of one of the parties last
night, suggesting that even those they represent a minority of wards
in the borough, they do hold those in power to question and that in
itself should be worth voting for?

Whilst that sounds reasonably logical (from this political outsiders
POV), how do we know that those in power aren't doing what's best for
all of us (hah, I know ...) or that having this thorn in their side is
likely to make it as easy for them to do what they think best (and
after all, the vast majority in the borough voted for them) and that
this 'opposition' has any (more) teeth than they might with no
councilors in power in the borough?

The guy on the phone was pretty reasonable, no hard sell or
undeliverable promises, just this point re being able to keep the
incumbent in check? Can they (or can they more by having *some*
representation than not)?

Cheers, T i m

[1] Irrespective we will still bother to attend in spite of them
moving the polling station from 50 to 150 paces away. ;-(

I'd suggest unless there is a party who you and many will be voting for,
stick to the ordinary four, Con Libdem, Labour, and green.

Brian

--

This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Andrew" wrote in message
...
On 21/04/2021 16:35, Fredxx wrote:
On 20/04/2021 20:47, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:25:41 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

well why not simply not bother to vote. They really couldn't care
less about the people who do that.

Unfortunately wouldn't understand even if I tried to explain it to
you. ;-(


The only reason I can think of is to then pillory the winners. You
spoiled your vote in the referendum, and then whinged at the outcome.

I may understand your philosophy, but only if you like being taken for a
fool.


+1

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 08:04:13 +0000, Spike
wrote:

On 21/04/2021 22:56, Fredxx wrote:
On 21/04/2021 22:24, T i m wrote:

See, like (I suspect) the majority, I *really* don't know enough about
it (at any level) to make a truly informed decision and until
something happens that means I need to learn more, I'll keep my head
in the sand, just like most people do re animal cruelty and
exploitation etc.

Sounds like laziness and consequential fire-fighting to me. The point of
democracy is to empower the people. Obviously democracy is wasted on the
likes of those who actively propose to spoil their paper who are too
idle or too thick to research the issues at hand.

ISTM that T i m is at least being consistent here, in both the microcosm
and the macrocosm. The former represents his approach to local elections
and the latter to the EU Referendum.

And many other things.

The consistency between these lies in in his "Don't know enough" trope
that he uses to justify his inaction in taking part the voting process.

Correct (and at lest I'm being honest, even if I'm underestimating my
knowledge compared to many).

I don't know how long he has lived in the area in which he now resides,

My entire life.

but he has clearly made no effort to follow local affairs.

Correct. I have however made considerable effort following those
things I'm interested in, like the majority.

Regarding the
EU Referendum, it is obvious to all that he lived in the EU for 43 years
and then claimed insufficient knowledge of it.

Not a 'claim' but a fact, again, along with the majority (if the truth
be told).

Since no-one at all knows
everything at local or international levels - how could they?

I have never expected everyone to know everything about anything.
However, to be able to make a 'rational' decision' you need to have a
good / accurate overall understanding and most people don't.

snip left brainer troll bs

If it can work (and be perfectly normal / acceptable) for that,
logical consistency says it should equally be valid for politics (and
religion etc).

When you mention logic and religion in the same sentence you really have
lost the plot.

The 'logic' was re the viewpoint, not the subject, but thanks for
playing troll. 4/10

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:06:22 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Mine is further than that away, but the problem really is from what I see,
the proliferation of parties and independents standing these days, We have
animal welfare, Christian parties, Rejoin the eu parties UKIP and Monster
Raving Loony who are putting up 13 candidates in one ward near me.

Ah, the solution is easy (apparently Brian). You have to stop whatever
you are doing / prefer to do to and research into all 13 candidates
(including background checks and checking their social media etc) and
then determine from all that who you think is most likely to be
trusted, most likely to do what's best for you / the locale / 'most
people' (depending on your POV on that sort of thing) and then make
your mark.

Keep quiet and just not vote or just turn up and toss a coin and no
one will question you or your ethics, as long as you just 'play the
game', that's all that counts (apparently). ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 09:31:07 +0100, Martin Brown
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:47, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:25:41 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

well why not simply not bother to vote. They really couldn't care
less about the people who do that.

Unfortunately wouldn't understand even if I tried to explain it to
you. ;-(

The problem with spoiling your vote is that they are not compelled to
report a high number of spoiled ballot papers.

No, they might not be 'compelled to' but the chances are they will be
recorded and studied by some.

They are compelled to
report an insanely low turnout.

To whom ooi?

This outcome seems to be extremely
likely in my neck of the woods since the only thing we get to vote on
this time is the stupid political appointee police commissioner.

Yeah, we had that recently but we didn't vote (or spoil our papers
etc). I have even less idea about them than I do any local councilors
(well, I know one personally but not someone I'm likely to vote for).

The last one was so inept that even her own party disowned her.

Yup, and that's the way isn't it (these days). They are all under
constant scrutiny by 'many eyes' and so I don't think it makes much
difference who is in power these days as they are all only walking
either side of the same line.

Parliament in the process of nuking NY councils by "unitarisation".

But they were voted in by a majority presumably so people are only
getting what they wanted?

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:08:33 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

I'd suggest unless there is a party who you and many will be voting for,
stick to the ordinary four, Con Libdem, Labour, and green.

But who is to say that 'Captain Bucket Head' or whoever couldn't
gather a team of sharp professionals together and do a much better job
than any of the old-skool / entrenched traditionals?

All of it is like a game of chess and I've never enjoyed that sort of
game, I'd rather be doing something practical.

Cheers, T i m

On 22 Apr 2021 09:30:21 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
snip

I think he means antipathy.

Nope, I meant what I typed.

I'm really 'not bovvered' about any of it (or I wouldn't turn up but
spoil my paper) because 'the people' will (and do) ensure that any of
the *really* bad things are stopped in their tracks.

If not the people, you just need to treat your local councilor to a
round of golf and some good food and drink and you can do what you
like. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On 22 Apr 2021 09:34:25 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

snip

Having separate District and County councils whose boundaries of
responsibility may be clear to councillors but not to the public, is probably
bad. Equally, having tiny unitary councils is also bad. Best to have
unitaries, but make them large.

There you are, you too would prefer something 'different' to what you
are voting on so what are you doing to change that?

Cheers, T i m

On 22/04/2021 09:46, T i m wrote:

All of it is like a game of chess and I've never enjoyed that sort of
game, I'd rather be doing something practical.

In that case, the solution to your self-manufactured problem is in your
own hands.

--
Spike

On 22/04/2021 09:05, T i m wrote:

So, you put yourself up as a local councillor and get voted in by 17%
of the electorate for that ward ... do you think you now represent the
majority of that ward?

No. You represent *all* of the people in the ward.

It's rather like the Armed Forces fighting an enemy - they fight for
*all* the people, not just a sub-set.

--
Spike

On 22/04/2021 10:54, T i m wrote:
On 22 Apr 2021 09:30:21 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
snip

I think he means antipathy.

Nope, I meant what I typed.

I'm really 'not bovvered' about any of it (or I wouldn't turn up but
spoil my paper) because 'the people' will (and do) ensure that any of
the *really* bad things are stopped in their tracks.

If not the people, you just need to treat your local councilor to a
round of golf and some good food and drink and you can do what you
like. ;-)


for someone who lacks interest in the current system you seem to spend a
lot of time telling others what you think is wrong with it

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

The fact that he intends to waste his time walking to the polling
station simply to scrawl some nonsense on his polling slip puts
him in the same league as those mindless people who spray graffiti
and other 'artwork' on walls, trains, buses, bridges, ....
When challenged, their excuse is "I'm making a statement".

The percentage of people who vote in local elections is very low,
and for elected police commissioners even lower. Simply drawing names
out of a hat might be more representative for the latter. Either that
or use 'buggins turn'.

Andrew


On 22/04/2021 10:08, Brian Gaff (Sofa) wrote:
I'd suggest unless there is a party who you and many will be voting for,
stick to the ordinary four, Con Libdem, Labour, and green.

Brian

On 22/04/2021 11:13, Spike wrote:
On 22/04/2021 09:46, T i m wrote:

All of it is like a game of chess and I've never enjoyed that sort of
game, I'd rather be doing something practical.

In that case, the solution to your self-manufactured problem is in your
own hands.


He could go round and collect all the dog poo bags hanging from
gates and branches, and then stand for election. Might get some
votes doing that.

On 21/04/2021 23:57, Fredxx wrote:
On 21/04/2021 21:56, ARW wrote:
On 20/04/2021 20:25, Andrew wrote:
On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

well why not simply not bother to vote. They really couldn't care
less about the people who do that.

The stupid **** is probably is unable to know what to do with a ballot
paper.

He does admit research is beyond his capability.

As is lateral thinking, going by his comments about chess.

On 22/04/2021 10:54, T i m wrote:
On 22 Apr 2021 09:30:21 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
snip

I think he means antipathy.

Nope, I meant what I typed.

I'm really 'not bovvered' about any of it (or I wouldn't turn up but
spoil my paper) because 'the people' will (and do) ensure that any of
the *really* bad things are stopped in their tracks.

If not the people, you just need to treat your local councilor to a
round of golf and some good food and drink and you can do what you
like. ;-)

Cheers, T i m


people should remember 7-UP (Granada TV). Neil wanted to be
an astronaut but after dropping out of Uni, working on a building site
(and clearly suffering from a mental issue in the programs), he ended
up standing for local election as a Lib Dem councillor and was elected
(probably with a turnout below 20%).
In one of the programs he admitted to making a rambling speech in the
council chamber, talking total gibberish and none of the other
councillors said a word. Clowns like this can have the final say over
important planning and other issues.

On 22/04/2021 09:55, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 00:14:05 +0100, John Rumm
wrote:

snip

What "better" system do you propose?

One that allows for people to formally express their apathy for the
status quo for one.

How is that useful?

Because it would indicate to those looking to manage the world *FOR
US* that we aren't happy with the way it's being done?

Only your vote counts in an election. A spoilt vote is a wasted vote and
counts the same for anyone who doesn't vote.

If I were a candidate, and the message you passed back to me was "meh,
not interested, can't be bothered", it's hardly actionable information
is it?

Then you come up with a system that's more inclusive. ;-)

There isn't one. We prefer a system where you vote for a person. It's
the best there is.

ISTM an election is not the time to bitch about the electoral system.

I didn't suggest it was but you have to start somewhere.

If you were looking to market a new product and you handed out mini
survey forms and one of the options was 'Meh', then I know that would
be a perfectly valid, interesting and useful response and have them
re-thinking how they might present / advertise / do the thing
differently.

A badly worded form. No survey works like that.

On 22/04/2021 09:55, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 23:15:23 +0100, Dave W
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:25:56 +0100, T i m wrote:


I didn't say I drew anything on my paper (and certainly nothing that
would perk your obvious penis interest), I said I 'spoiled it' and I
normally do so simply by writing 'NOTA' underneath.

Cheers, T i m

What does 'NOTA' mean?

And you think I'm 'bonkers' ...

We all do, it was a simple question. Even Rod had the good sense to
answer it.

On 22/04/2021 10:21, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:06:22 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Mine is further than that away, but the problem really is from what I see,
the proliferation of parties and independents standing these days, We have
animal welfare, Christian parties, Rejoin the eu parties UKIP and Monster
Raving Loony who are putting up 13 candidates in one ward near me.

Ah, the solution is easy (apparently Brian). You have to stop whatever
you are doing / prefer to do to and research

That's a bit rich for someone who admits to being too lazy or ignorant
to do his own research.

On 22/04/2021 10:03, Robin wrote:
On 22/04/2021 09:31, Martin Brown wrote:
On 20/04/2021 20:47, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2021 20:25:41 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 20/04/2021 20:17, T i m wrote:
With the upcoming local elections I had planned to spoil my paper [1]

well why not simply not bother to vote. They really couldn't care
less about the people who do that.

Unfortunately wouldn't understand even if I tried to explain it to
you. ;-(

The problem with spoiling your vote is that they are not compelled to
report a high number of spoiled ballot papers.

Returning officers must by law draw up a statement showing the number of
ballot papers rejected (under several heads).

They might, but the newspapers don't report them.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 12:05:47 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

The fact that he intends to waste his time walking to the polling
station

We will be taking the dog out past there 'anyway' so it's no waste of
time. Faceplant No1

simply to scrawl

Write neatly (Faceplant No2)

some nonsense on his polling slip

Only 'nonsense' if you don't understand the meaning of NOTA? (And so
Faceplant No3).

puts
him in the same league as those mindless people who spray graffiti
and other 'artwork' on walls, trains, buses, bridges, ....

Given it's not any form of graphic, tag or logo, but well accepted
acronym and on a medium I'm invited to mark, that makes it Faceplant
No4. That's what happens when you let your fantasies rule your sense.

When challenged, their excuse is "I'm making a statement".

No need to be challenged, it's not illegal and is my democratic right.
(So Faceplant No5)

The percentage of people who vote in local elections is very low,
and for elected police commissioners even lower.

Bingo. I wonder why? I wonder if it could be for any / all of the
reasons I've mentioned?

Simply drawing names
out of a hat might be more representative for the latter.

Quite.

Either that
or use 'buggins turn'.

Could be as good a system as we have now.

So, you go from trying to spread FUD with your ad-hominems and then
agree with me. You need help (Rod?). ;-(

Cheers, T i m

On 21/04/2021 23:15, Dave W wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:25:56 +0100, T i m wrote:


I didn't say I drew anything on my paper (and certainly nothing that
would perk your obvious penis interest), I said I 'spoiled it' and I
normally do so simply by writing 'NOTA' underneath.

Cheers, T i m

What does 'NOTA' mean?

None
Of
The
Above

--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 11:36:49 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 22/04/2021 10:54, T i m wrote:
On 22 Apr 2021 09:30:21 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
snip

I think he means antipathy.

Nope, I meant what I typed.

I'm really 'not bovvered' about any of it (or I wouldn't turn up but
spoil my paper) because 'the people' will (and do) ensure that any of
the *really* bad things are stopped in their tracks.

If not the people, you just need to treat your local councilor to a
round of golf and some good food and drink and you can do what you
like. ;-)


for someone who lacks interest in the current system you seem to spend a
lot of time telling others what you think is wrong with it

And the link between those two things isn't obvious to you then I
guess. ;-(

And there was me thinking you were one of the ones who 'got it'. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 12:16:57 +0100, Andrew
wrote:

On 22/04/2021 10:54, T i m wrote:
On 22 Apr 2021 09:30:21 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
snip

I think he means antipathy.

Nope, I meant what I typed.

I'm really 'not bovvered' about any of it (or I wouldn't turn up but
spoil my paper) because 'the people' will (and do) ensure that any of
the *really* bad things are stopped in their tracks.

If not the people, you just need to treat your local councilor to a
round of golf and some good food and drink and you can do what you
like. ;-)

Cheers, T i m


people should remember 7-UP (Granada TV). Neil wanted to be
an astronaut but after dropping out of Uni, working on a building site
(and clearly suffering from a mental issue in the programs), he ended
up standing for local election as a Lib Dem councillor and was elected
(probably with a turnout below 20%).
In one of the programs he admitted to making a rambling speech in the
council chamber, talking total gibberish and none of the other
councillors said a word. Clowns like this can have the final say over
important planning and other issues.

So, first you try to take the **** and then you agree with me? Pull
yerself together ffs.

Cheers, T i m

On 22 Apr 2021 11:21:22 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 22 Apr 2021 at 10:54:24 BST, T i m wrote:

On 22 Apr 2021 09:30:21 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
snip

I think he means antipathy.

Nope, I meant what I typed.

I'm really 'not bovvered' about any of it (or I wouldn't turn up but
spoil my paper) because 'the people' will (and do) ensure that any of
the *really* bad things are stopped in their tracks.

So in fact you can't make your mind up whether you're apathetic about it (i.e.
not bovvered), or whether you really *are* bovvered and so experience
antipathy towards the current system. Which is it?

You started playing with the words. I have made my position clear to
everyone but trolling left brainers.

And here's a fact: once you're elected, you represent *all* your constituents,
not just those who voted for you or even just those who voted.

And you think I wasn't aware of that fact, after repeatedly thanking
you for voting everone out of the EU for the last 4 years?

And this is the
case even if you're elected unopposed (i.e. no other candidate stood against
you).

I would have though that would be even more the case, not just 'even'?

If you're elected unopposed then there isn't even a vote; you're
officially declared elected even before polling day.

Lovely. So, like I said, 'just like a World Champion', just of those
who went in for it.

So you can call that councillor with your issue any time of day or night and
it's their job to help you. No golf required.

Ah, again we see the left brainer logic blinkering your real world
understanding of all this. ;-(

Whilst I'm sure it makes for a good usher or counter, it's not so good
for understanding how the world *actually* often works, which is
strange considering your issue with 'snouters' in the EU?

OK, decide to build some locally unwanted building with all sorts of
promises to how it's going to bring work to the area, how you are
going to make improvements to the local environment and help with
local community projects, whilst making sure you get as many
councilors onboard with invites to tours of similar projects and '(of
course) with all the associated 'freebies' and watch the project go
though, in spite of a petition of 5000 signatures from the local
people who are against it, because they see the truth through the BS.

Or the approval that finally get's granted on that monstrosity
extension ...

Cash for questions anyone?

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:22:33 +0000, Spike
wrote:

On 22/04/2021 09:05, T i m wrote:

So, you put yourself up as a local councillor and get voted in by 17%
of the electorate for that ward ... do you think you now represent the
majority of that ward?

No. You represent *all* of the people in the ward.

Oh, you left brainers ... you are such hard work ... ;-(

You really only get / deal in black and white don't you, thinking that
'representing' in practice is the same as representing in goals,
ethics, morals and principals.

It's rather like the Armed Forces fighting an enemy - they fight for
*all* the people, not just a sub-set.

Again, only in practice, not principle. No slaughterman is killing any
animals for me, even though they are killing animals. There will be
loads of people who are very much against 'our boys' being at risk for
whatever the reason.

So, I want to reduce animal cruelty and suffering and a councilor
get's voted in who happens to be a dairy farmer. How much positive
representation and support do you think I will get from them re
closing all dairys in the area?

(Don't bother answering as it's been obvious for a long time (inc in
this thread) you have no idea about any of it or actually being
interested in the spirit of the question).

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 12:53:37 +0100, Fredxx
wrote:

On 22/04/2021 10:21, T i m wrote:
On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 10:06:22 +0100, "Brian Gaff \(Sofa\)"
wrote:

Mine is further than that away, but the problem really is from what I see,
the proliferation of parties and independents standing these days, We have
animal welfare, Christian parties, Rejoin the eu parties UKIP and Monster
Raving Loony who are putting up 13 candidates in one ward near me.

Ah, the solution is easy (apparently Brian). You have to stop whatever
you are doing / prefer to do to and research

That's a bit rich for someone who admits to being too lazy or ignorant
to do his own research.

You really are thick aren't you (or just a left brainer) to not be
able to spot that as sarcasm.

Even the big 'apparently' wasn't a good enough clue for you.

I really do pity you, having to live with your 'problem' in a world
where so much information is conveyed between the lines. ;-(

While you are down there faceplanting, could you give 'Andrew' a hand
up. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On Thu, 22 Apr 2021 13:30:47 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 21/04/2021 23:15, Dave W wrote:
On Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:25:56 +0100, T i m wrote:


I didn't say I drew anything on my paper (and certainly nothing that
would perk your obvious penis interest), I said I 'spoiled it' and I
normally do so simply by writing 'NOTA' underneath.

Cheers, T i m

What does 'NOTA' mean?

None
Of
The
Above

What is funny is people who try to have a go at me on something like
this but who don't know a very commonly used acronym associated with
the same subject!

No wonder that don't get my question! ;-)

Cheers, T i m

On 22/04/2021 13:43, T i m wrote:
On 22 Apr 2021 11:21:22 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:

On 22 Apr 2021 at 10:54:24 BST, T i m wrote:

On 22 Apr 2021 09:30:21 GMT, Tim Streater
wrote:
snip

I think he means antipathy.

Nope, I meant what I typed.

I'm really 'not bovvered' about any of it (or I wouldn't turn up but
spoil my paper) because 'the people' will (and do) ensure that any of
the *really* bad things are stopped in their tracks.

So in fact you can't make your mind up whether you're apathetic about it (i.e.
not bovvered), or whether you really *are* bovvered and so experience
antipathy towards the current system. Which is it?

You started playing with the words. I have made my position clear to
everyone but trolling left brainers.

There is no play with words. Clearly from resorting yo abuse you don't
understand the difference between apathy and antipathy.

Not being bothered sounds more like apathy.

https://www.classicthesaurus.com/unb...ve_undisturbed

And here's a fact: once you're elected, you represent *all* your constituents,
not just those who voted for you or even just those who voted.

And you think I wasn't aware of that fact, after repeatedly thanking
you for voting everone out of the EU for the last 4 years?

And we thank you for your spoilt vote.

And this is the
case even if you're elected unopposed (i.e. no other candidate stood against
you).

I would have though that would be even more the case, not just 'even'?

If you're elected unopposed then there isn't even a vote; you're
officially declared elected even before polling day.

Lovely. So, like I said, 'just like a World Champion', just of those
who went in for it.

So you can call that councillor with your issue any time of day or night and
it's their job to help you. No golf required.

Ah, again we see the left brainer logic blinkering your real world
understanding of all this. ;-(

Most councillors are responsive. It's how they get elected.

Whilst I'm sure it makes for a good usher or counter, it's not so good
for understanding how the world *actually* often works, which is
strange considering your issue with 'snouters' in the EU?

You've lost the plot, what has a Rhinogradentia to do with the EU.

OK, decide to build some locally unwanted building with all sorts of
promises to how it's going to bring work to the area, how you are
going to make improvements to the local environment and help with
local community projects, whilst making sure you get as many
councilors onboard with invites to tours of similar projects and '(of
course) with all the associated 'freebies' and watch the project go
though, in spite of a petition of 5000 signatures from the local
people who are against it, because they see the truth through the BS.

You really have lost the plot, best explain.

Or the approval that finally get's granted on that monstrosity
extension ...

Cash for questions anyone?

Then it's your duty to stand against those you dislike so much. However,
given the tripe you post here you might still find them more popular
than support your policies.