Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
269 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 24


  Reply # 550598 27-Nov-2011 16:02
Send private message

NonprayingMantis:
rhy7s:
codyc1515: found the Libertarianz party which seems to align with my views.

From reading their policies it sounds like you might want to check out how Somalia's going.


I didn't realise somalia had a libertarian government.  Everything I have read suggests it is anarchy there, not a libertarian government. there is a [retty big difference between libertarianism and anarchy


You think? Maybe you could say libertarianism is anarchy with property rights, there's hardly a great divide, perhaps anarchy's a little less mean spirited? I suppose you could say Somalia is operating under a xeer system at the moment.

84 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1


  Reply # 550618 27-Nov-2011 17:15
Send private message

The problem with not voting

With only 65 % of the voters turning out many conclusions can be drawn.

With National getting approximately 50% Does that not mean  that they only have support from 33% of the registered voters.  Empathy towards voting is major concern.  Perhaps  it should be compulsory so when important  issues are to be decided at least the ruling party can argue they have the support of the majority of all voters.

Those who didn’t vote have very little comeback.

1923 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 139


  Reply # 550701 27-Nov-2011 22:15
Send private message

simplestuff: The problem with not voting
With only 65 % of the voters turning out many conclusions can be drawn.

I think the figure was closer to 74%, which is still considered low.

 With National getting approximately 50% Does that not mean  that they only have support from 33% of the registered voters. 

No... because we can't know how many of the 26% that didn't vote may also have supported them.
But historically I believe it's voters from the left who are less motivated to vote....  it's probably apathy rather than empathy

  Empathy towards voting is major concern.  Perhaps  it should be compulsory so when important  issues are to be decided at least the ruling party can argue they have the support of the majority of all voters.
Those who didn’t vote have very little comeback.

I don't think making it compulsory will change anything...
If you can't be bothered, is a fine going to motivate you??  And will you really make an informed decision if you can't be arsed??
Soo instead you don't vote and go on to become part of the (apathetic) vocal minority?????? 

65 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 550768 28-Nov-2011 08:23
Send private message

Under MMP it's impossible not to vote. Because it's based on percentages, your actions count whether you vote or not. This time round, everyone who didn't vote effectively voted for NZ First, by ensuring they got over the 5% threshold. So cheers you lazy sods, I'm sure Winston is grateful.

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571


  Reply # 550781 28-Nov-2011 09:14
Send private message

talisker: Under MMP it's impossible not to vote. Because it's based on percentages, your actions count whether you vote or not. This time round, everyone who didn't vote effectively voted for NZ First, by ensuring they got over the 5% threshold. So cheers you lazy sods, I'm sure Winston is grateful.


Unless they happened to get over the 5% threshold by a single vote,  then my action of voting or not would have made no difference to the outcome i.e. they would have gotten the 5% whether or not I voted.
In fact they got 6.81%of the popular vote, so no single vote would have changed that.

BDFL - Memuneh
61515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12235

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 550782 28-Nov-2011 09:17
Send private message

Not a single vote, but if those who didn't vote actually thought a bit more, they would see that every single votewould reduce that percentage, to a point where many single votes would do the trick.

It's the attitude of "I don't care, it wouldn't change the outcome" that causes this. It's a vicious cycle.

Democracy requires participation. If there's no participation then something will come to fill the vacuum created by those who think "I don't care" and from what we've seen in history, this something is not usually a good thing.








65 posts

Master Geek


  Reply # 550806 28-Nov-2011 10:02
Send private message

What I'm getting at is under MMP it's a fallacy to think you can opt out and not take any part in the process. Your "non vote" has an impact, in exactly the same way as an actual vote. Everyone has an amount of power to exert in the election. You can't stop that power being used. If you vote, you get to choose which party and candidate benefits from it. If you don't vote you have no influence over who benefits - it will depend how the voting pans out. By sitting on your lazy behind you may vote in a party completely opposed to your views.

18527 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5305

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 550815 28-Nov-2011 10:24
Send private message

NonprayingMantis:
talisker: Under MMP it's impossible not to vote. Because it's based on percentages, your actions count whether you vote or not. This time round, everyone who didn't vote effectively voted for NZ First, by ensuring they got over the 5% threshold. So cheers you lazy sods, I'm sure Winston is grateful.


Unless they happened to get over the 5% threshold by a single vote,  then my action of voting or not would have made no difference to the outcome i.e. they would have gotten the 5% whether or not I voted.
In fact they got 6.81%of the popular vote, so no single vote would have changed that.


Oh god, this again? We get it already, you can't be arsed voting unless you vote single handedly controls the outcome,  but you are still wrong, what about the Christchurch Electorate?

As has been pointed out to you time and time again, single votes in MMP can make a difference (even if it's small), and your lack of vote has the exact same effect. Well done for not voting, you voted for Winston!

13355 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6282

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 550821 28-Nov-2011 10:30
Send private message

First up I did vote.

Under MMP not voting affects percentages and through extrapolation of that theory a conscious non vote is a conscious decision to affect the outcome with out having to select a candidate from a batch of candidates you do not support or wish to see elected.

Our electoral does not really give us access to the selection of candidates process. It's like say being presented with the choice of Flu, a Cold, Measles or Chicken Pox and you need to choose one. The Only way you can chose none is by a non vote.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


First time caller
148 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 32

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 550825 28-Nov-2011 10:34
Send private message

KiwiNZ: First up I did vote.

Under MMP not voting affects percentages and through extrapolation of that theory a conscious non vote is a conscious decision to affect the outcome with out having to select a candidate from a batch of candidates you do not support or wish to see elected.

Our electoral does not really give us access to the selection of candidates process. It's like say being presented with the choice of Flu, a Cold, Measles or Chicken Pox and you need to choose one. The Only way you can chose none is by a non vote.


No, you are not selecting "None" by not voting. You are saying "Let someone else choose for me".




@Shadowfoot on Twitter


18527 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 5305

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 550828 28-Nov-2011 10:38
Send private message

Shadowfoot:
KiwiNZ: First up I did vote.

Under MMP not voting affects percentages and through extrapolation of that theory a conscious non vote is a conscious decision to affect the outcome with out having to select a candidate from a batch of candidates you do not support or wish to see elected.

Our electoral does not really give us access to the selection of candidates process. It's like say being presented with the choice of Flu, a Cold, Measles or Chicken Pox and you need to choose one. The Only way you can chose none is by a non vote.


No, you are not selecting "None" by not voting. You are saying "Let someone else choose for me".


Nonprayingmantis: This point is very valid, you should consider it for next time.
 

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571


  Reply # 550832 28-Nov-2011 10:53
Send private message

networkn:
Shadowfoot:
KiwiNZ: First up I did vote.

Under MMP not voting affects percentages and through extrapolation of that theory a conscious non vote is a conscious decision to affect the outcome with out having to select a candidate from a batch of candidates you do not support or wish to see elected.

Our electoral does not really give us access to the selection of candidates process. It's like say being presented with the choice of Flu, a Cold, Measles or Chicken Pox and you need to choose one. The Only way you can chose none is by a non vote.


No, you are not selecting "None" by not voting. You are saying "Let someone else choose for me".


Nonprayingmantis: This point is very valid, you should consider it for next time.
 

But by voting I would ALSO saying “let the others choose for me” since my vote wouldn’t have changed the outcome of this election one jot – whether in terms of which party gets elected or which candidates get in, or even how many seats the minor parties got. The election results are the will of the majority, not the will of me. My particular preference doesn't effect the majority, so the majority chooses for me whether I vote or not.

Even in ChCh the special votes are yet to be counted. The fact that at a point before all the votes have been counted the election is tied is an interesting statistical anomaly, but unless the final count remains a tie after special votes and the inevitable recount, it is irrelevant.

(as an aside, I did actually vote, but not because I thought it would make any difference or because I want the right to complain, but rather because my wife was nagging me to do it and we happened to be in the area. Happy wife, happy life!)

13355 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6282

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 550843 28-Nov-2011 11:17
Send private message

Shadowfoot:
KiwiNZ: First up I did vote.

Under MMP not voting affects percentages and through extrapolation of that theory a conscious non vote is a conscious decision to affect the outcome with out having to select a candidate from a batch of candidates you do not support or wish to see elected.

Our electoral does not really give us access to the selection of candidates process. It's like say being presented with the choice of Flu, a Cold, Measles or Chicken Pox and you need to choose one. The Only way you can chose none is by a non vote.


No, you are not selecting "None" by not voting. You are saying "Let someone else choose for me".


So you are saying one should vote for someone that is not suitable or you simply don't agree with. That my friend is a wasted vote.

There is a BIG difference between someone who has made a conscious decision to affect by not voting than someone who does not vote because they cannot be bothered.




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


8027 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 387

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 550859 28-Nov-2011 11:29
Send private message

rhy7s:
NonprayingMantis:
rhy7s:
codyc1515: found the Libertarianz party which seems to align with my views.

From reading their policies it sounds like you might want to check out how Somalia's going.


I didn't realise somalia had a libertarian government.  Everything I have read suggests it is anarchy there, not a libertarian government. there is a [retty big difference between libertarianism and anarchy


You think? Maybe you could say libertarianism is anarchy with property rights, there's hardly a great divide, perhaps anarchy's a little less mean spirited? I suppose you could say Somalia is operating under a xeer system at the moment.


There are quite a few flavours of libertarianism that are fairly different.

I have to say putting up Somalia as an example is clearly is putting up a strawman as it's a failed state or no state.

Opinions differ but Estonia tends to be considered the most libertarian country.

621 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 54

Subscriber

  Reply # 550871 28-Nov-2011 11:47
Send private message

Is there an option on the voting form to abstain? I have to say I've never noticed if there is, or even looked for it.

I'd support compulsory voting if there was.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.