British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today • Hacker News Board

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#41

Post by JonnieCache » Thu, May 05, 2011, 12:50 PM UTC

mseebach wrote: post #30

JonnieCache wrote: post #10

The local office of the Yes campaign is just across the corridor from us. Bigup. Vote, people. Doesn't matter who/what it's for. Spoil your ballot if you have to. Just make your voice heard.

No. To paraphrase Dijkstra, voting is to democracy as telescopes are to astronomy. It DOES matter who/what you vote for. And if you don't believe that, why would you believe that doing anything at all with your ballot counts as making your voice heard? Democracy is about participation. Not campaigning, participation. You need to make your voice heard at all times, not just at elections (frankly, elections are probabl…

Obviously I don't believe that it doesnt matter who you vote for, what I was trying to say was that I'd rather have someone vote in a way that I disagree with, than not vote at all.

It matters who you vote for, but it doesn't matter to me.

I'm trying to make it clear that I'm not advocating voting in an attempt to advance my own agenda, but rather out of a simple desire for people to make use of their rights as citizens of a democracy.

Notice that I also advocated ballot spoiling as an alternative to casting a vote for any of the choices presented. If you really can't bring yourself to vote for any of the parties, and I certainly wouldn't blame you there, at least go down to the polling station and write "YOU ARE ALL BASTARDS" across the ballot in your own blood or something. That way, you still show up in the turnout figures, avoiding the false impression of voter apathy.

And yes, I definitely agree that voting is probably the least important part of democratic participation, although a lot of the other parts are becoming increasingly frustrated around here...

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#42

Post by petercooper » Thu, May 05, 2011, 12:51 PM UTC

hnhg wrote: post #39

petercooper wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is. If you can't decide one way or the other. Which is why I've not voted on the issue today. (Though if there were an "abstain" or "unsure" box, I'd have voted for that.)

A spoiled vote is the traditional way of expressing that.

I used to do that, but the problem is spoiled votes are lumped together for reporting purposes, so there's no real way to judge whether people are protesting, finding the ballot form confusing, or whatever.

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#43

Post by innes » Thu, May 05, 2011, 12:58 PM UTC

arethuza wrote: post #29

MikeTaylor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The German system sounds good. But the UK Conservative Party's argument against simple AV has been "it's too complicated for people to understand". Trying to get people to vote for something that genuinely IS a bit complicated would be a complete non-starter at this point. Anyway, right now it's AV or Continue As You Were. That's the choice we Brits have to make TODAY, and I do hope that any of you reading this will…

We have two elections in Scotland today - the referendum and the elections to the Scottish Parliament. There are two ballot papers for the latter - one for a constituency and another for a region. As far as I could tell (I lost count) the regional ballot paper we had here had an amazing number of parties/candidates - what looked like 4 different breeds of socialists (excluding Labour, of course) and a similar number…

I have to disagree. It's a list of options, albeit taller than a sheet of A4. Instructions: put a cross next to your choice.

If that ballot paper is confusing then you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#44

Post by MEHColeman » Thu, May 05, 2011, 1:08 PM UTC

petercooper wrote: post #40

jbert wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree. But in the spirit of "the perfect is the enemy of the good" if AV/IRV is an improvement over FPTP (which it seems to be) - then is there any downside (in terms of fairness of outcode) to a 'yes' vote in this referendum?

This is a personal view but I think there is. I think that AV could make the process of voting different/confusing enough for many voters to be turned off of voting or, perhaps, screwing up their ballots. If I agree with only one element of the "No" campaign, it's that enough of the electorate is stupid/ignorant enough to find the change difficult changing the outcome of future elections.

This probably sounds terrible, but if you are too "stupid/ignorant" to write your preferences in order 1-5, are you really competent enough to be voting? I really don't expect there are many people (or any, I mean, really?) who are that stupid - that's just doesn't seem a valid reason to be against it. If you just write "1" instead of an "X", it's exactly as easy as the current system. Could you do it? Can you really think of anyone who couldn't do it? The entire tory party elected Cameron that way, it's not complicated at all. It does seem to be an effective scare tactic, though ;)

To quote Dara O Briain from twitter, "Listen, vote NO, if you're happy to trade lack of representation for a clear result. That's a perfectly fine choice to make. I respect that. But if you vote NO, because it's sounds complicated or you don't like Clegg, or the Irish are in debt, you're an idiot.

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#45

Post by Pahalial » Thu, May 05, 2011, 1:10 PM UTC

All shortcomings of AV aside, as a Canadian who just watched a majority get in thanks to a combined 6,021 votes in some dozen marginal ridings, let me just say that I'm jealous of this referendum and I wish you the best.

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#46

Post by henrikschroder » Thu, May 05, 2011, 1:15 PM UTC

danparsonson wrote: post #8

josephShmoe wrote: post #6

AV, or IRV (Instant Runoff Voting), is arguably the worst form of preferential voting in existence. Take this example of IRV totals for four candidates ordered by preference: 30% a; b; c; d 35% c; b; d; a 20% d; b; a; c 15% b; d; c; a Given the voting breakdown, most people would agree that candidate b should win, because no candidate got a majority of first preference votes and b got a sweeping majority of second pr…

Unfortunately we haven't been offered a suggestion box, just a choice between AV and FPTP - personally, AV seems like an improvement on FPTP, even if it's not the best possible system overall.

Why are those the only choices?

Why not switch to proportional representation instead, using D'Hondt or Saint-Laguë? Or is there such strong support for the current single-winner system in the UK that noone wants to change the base idea?

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#47

Post by frobozz » Thu, May 05, 2011, 1:21 PM UTC

petercooper wrote: post #40

jbert wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree. But in the spirit of "the perfect is the enemy of the good" if AV/IRV is an improvement over FPTP (which it seems to be) - then is there any downside (in terms of fairness of outcode) to a 'yes' vote in this referendum?

This is a personal view but I think there is. I think that AV could make the process of voting different/confusing enough for many voters to be turned off of voting or, perhaps, screwing up their ballots. If I agree with only one element of the "No" campaign, it's that enough of the electorate is stupid/ignorant enough to find the change difficult changing the outcome of future elections.

The converse view:

Surely people who are so stupid/ignorant that this system would stop them voting, are too stupid/ignorant to be able to vote effectively in any election.

You may argue that it sounds a bit elitist, but personally, I want an electorate capable of making informed choices in the voting booth.

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#48

Post by MikeTaylor » Thu, May 05, 2011, 1:34 PM UTC

henrikschroder wrote: post #46

danparsonson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately we haven't been offered a suggestion box, just a choice between AV and FPTP - personally, AV seems like an improvement on FPTP, even if it's not the best possible system overall.

Why are those the only choices? Why not switch to proportional representation instead, using D'Hondt or Saint-Laguë? Or is there such strong support for the current single-winner system in the UK that noone wants to change the base idea?

The only reason we got the referendum at all is because the Conservatives didn't win an outright majority of seats, and so weren't able to form a government after the last election. They had to form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, and the LD's terms for lending their support to a party that they have very little in common with was they they insisted on the AV referendum. The Conservatives grudgingly accepted this, but would never have agreed to a referendum on full PR.

Basically, the entire thing is, sadly, driven by self-interest. The Tories don't want AV because they will probably lose some seats under it; but they DEFINITELY don't want PR, because they (and Labour) definitely would lose seats to the Lib Dems.

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#49

Post by arethuza » Thu, May 05, 2011, 1:34 PM UTC

innes wrote: post #43

arethuza wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have two elections in Scotland today - the referendum and the elections to the Scottish Parliament. There are two ballot papers for the latter - one for a constituency and another for a region. As far as I could tell (I lost count) the regional ballot paper we had here had an amazing number of parties/candidates - what looked like 4 different breeds of socialists (excluding Labour, of course) and a similar number…

I have to disagree. It's a list of options, albeit taller than a sheet of A4. Instructions: put a cross next to your choice. If that ballot paper is confusing then you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

That's what I meant - nobody gets confused with what we have at the moment even though the ballot papers are huge and the regional seats are selected using PR.

Re: British hackers: stop voting for lizards; start voting for people today

#50

Post by estel » Thu, May 05, 2011, 1:35 PM UTC

henrikschroder wrote: post #46

danparsonson wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately we haven't been offered a suggestion box, just a choice between AV and FPTP - personally, AV seems like an improvement on FPTP, even if it's not the best possible system overall.

Why are those the only choices? Why not switch to proportional representation instead, using D'Hondt or Saint-Laguë? Or is there such strong support for the current single-winner system in the UK that noone wants to change the base idea?

Neither of the main political parties (Labour, Conservatives) want to support STV because it will greatly diminish their power in Parliament, therefore there will be no possibility of it being on the agenda either in this Parliament or at any other time in the next twenty years.

As it stands, the "No" campaign merely for AV has, for a number of reasons, managed to convince more than enough people that this is a hatefully undemocratic change to our electoral system - regardless of how tiny an effect it will have on anything - that I can't see STV having a chance for many decades yet.