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
1626 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 275

Subscriber

  Reply # 2101481 4-Oct-2018 12:45
Send private message quote this post

 

I was alluding to the fact that the "representatives" and the party faithful have more influence on the decisions being made than the rest of us. Whilst all our votes are equal, the value of each person's vote is less than the value of (currently) the Labour party heirarchy and MPs.

 

As well, you don't get to vote on issues you care about. You get to vote for a package deal of whatever Labour+hangers-on offers vs what National+hangers-on offers. If I prefer some elements of Labour's policy and some elements of National's, I cannot effectively express that opinion. Either I vote for the Labour package, and implicitly support some of their policies that I don't like, or I vote for the National package. Even worse, in a coalition world, often aspects of the package aren't decided until after the election. 

 

And, you don't get to vote on things that have changed since the last election. You hope that, when some issue crops up, whoever is in power will do what the majority of the population wants.

 

 

You have an overly simplistic view on how to run a country.  Imagine the carnage that would ensue if every-time a decision was made you could just vote by logging on.  There are consequences for every piece of policy and legislation that gets acted upon.  Why you would think average Joe has taken the time to understand, challenge and consider these enough to be the one voting is beyond me..


2484 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1218

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2101492 4-Oct-2018 13:10
Send private message quote this post

SaltyNZ:

 

Election tampering is completely different. You may never know an election has been stolen from the country, the consequences of a stolen election could be as dire as the Donald Trump New Zealand Edition(TM), and there's no obvious way to fix it even if you are pretty sure it happened.

 

 

This is still looking at an election as a one-off, irreversible event. Like buying a CD instead of listening to Spotify. It doesn't have to be that way.

 

Imagine if the cost of a referendum was close to zero, and one could be run in a short time frame. In this scenario, a stolen "election" isn't a huge deal. You patch the problem and hold another election next week. If you think that one is fraudulent too, you do the same again. Or maybe you just run an "election" (a bunch of referenda, really, since you won't be electing representatives) every week, regardless. This incidentally means that hacking an election isn't such an attractive proposition; the hackers only get the benefit of it for a week or two, rather than for the next 3-5 years.

 

There's also no real DTNZE issue. Firstly, you don't really need elections, because, secondly, you no longer need a DT to make decisions on your behalf. Thirdly, since the power is shifted back to the people, the role of leader is no longer attractive to the power-hungry. And, fourthly, if the majority want DTNZE out, he's gone.

 

 


4643 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2153

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 2101493 4-Oct-2018 13:11
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

itxtme:

 

You have an overly simplistic view on how to run a country.  Imagine the carnage that would ensue if every-time a decision was made you could just vote by logging on.  There are consequences for every piece of policy and legislation that gets acted upon.  Why you would think average Joe has taken the time to understand, challenge and consider these enough to be the one voting is beyond me..

 

 

 

 

That's why I think that a hybrid system is the least-worst of the direct democracy models. It probably already has a fancy name but if so I don't know what. It works like this: the country is divided up into electorates of roughly equal population, and a proportional election is held in each. Each candidate that receives votes in the electorate is sent to parliament holding that number of votes. Suppose there are 100K voters, and four candidates. They receive 51,000, 19,000, 20,000 and 10,000 votes respectively.

 

When a bill is debated, each MP casts their votes. So the first of our local candidates votes yes - 51,000, and the other three vote no - 49,000 altogether. All the votes from all the MPs are tallied and the result is determined.

 

However, if I really care specifically about a given bill I can register to vote directly on that bill. I voted for the 20,000 vote candidate, and prefer Yes to No on this issue. So now we have 51,000 (Yes), 19,000 (No), 19,999 (No), 10,000 (No) and 1 (Yes).

 

Overall I think this system balances the risk of Joe Average making a dumb vote versus some issue where the public feels very strongly - strongly enough to do something about it. It means that if I like 90% of a party's stance, then I can vote directly against them on the other 10%. It does not preclude political parties, and it still works with MMP (you just get 2 votes to retrieve, if you want).

 

Obviously there would need to be some specifics put in place to ensure we don't end up with 1000 MPs - minimum thresholds being the obvious answer but you could also limit the MPs to one per electorate and use preferential voting to select him/her, which would lead to the candidate being elected who most represents the electorate.





iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


2484 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1218

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2101511 4-Oct-2018 13:29
Send private message quote this post

itxtme:

 

You have an overly simplistic view on how to run a country.  Imagine the carnage that would ensue if every-time a decision was made you could just vote by logging on.  There are consequences for every piece of policy and legislation that gets acted upon.  Why you would think average Joe has taken the time to understand, challenge and consider these enough to be the one voting is beyond me..

 

 

Well, yes, I've dumbed the idea down to meet the audience. ;)

 

This whole idea of "Trust us, it's too complicated for you, so we'll make the decision for you" has been trotted out since time immemorial by people who want to retain (or acquire) power. Kings and Popes and all the rest have essentially used this argument.

 

One of the benefits of a democracy is that the collective thinking power of the population will make a better decision than that of an oligarchy or a monarch. Maybe every Joe won't understand all the nuances, but collectively they all will. We've sacrificed that thinking power in our representative democracy.

 

Secondly, I believe that "the average Joe can't understand the issues" is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you want to make decisions, you limit the information that Joe has so that *he* *can't* make a good decision. And trot out "It's very very complicated...". If Joe can make decisions, he will take the trouble to be informed as to what the issues are and how he will be affected. And the people proposing, and opposing, the change will take the trouble to make sure that Joe has the information he needs.

 

 


1626 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 275

Subscriber

  Reply # 2101561 4-Oct-2018 14:04
2 people support this post
Send private message quote this post

Frankv I think you have no idea how much work and advice is given to the politician that fronts a policy that is implemented.  What you are suggesting is like having the workers set the strategy for a business, and removing the CEO and board..  Good luck with that


5207 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2119


  Reply # 2101617 4-Oct-2018 16:27
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Do we really want to put the security of our democracy in the hands of the cheapest tenderer?

 

I can hear Vlad laughing already.

 

]edit: afterthought - one of the issues I've read about in  some of the suffrage articles is postal voting was considered as an option at the time to get more women voting.  It was opposed quite strongly because people claimed men would direct heir wives votes. 

 

Online voting has an analogous problem.  You don't know the person clicking is actually the registered voter.  It's fertile ground for intimidation and corruption]





Mike

460 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 229


  Reply # 2101946 5-Oct-2018 09:30
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

Why does evething have to be digital these days? I enjoy walking to the school on election day with my family and casting my vote. Heck, even on holiday I have made the effort to find a polling booth. If people find that too difficult I'm not these are people I want having a say.

I also like reading real books and newspapers. Maybe I'm just old fashioned.

125 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 21


  Reply # 2102050 5-Oct-2018 10:47
Send private message quote this post

I don't see why it has to be an all or nothing setup. STV elections require paper forms input into a computer to calculate the results anyway. If you want to walk to school on election day with your family and cast your vote then go for it. I however would like the option of doing it online. 


13545 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2448

Trusted

  Reply # 2102052 5-Oct-2018 10:52
Send private message quote this post

Delphinus:

 

I don't see why it has to be an all or nothing setup. STV elections require paper forms input into a computer to calculate the results anyway. 

 

 

That's a good point. Its already done online, so at risk of the vagaries of the insecure internet.

 

I favour online voting, my only concern is voters being coerced, which at the ballot box you cannot be. But you can also vote online in private if you wish and if coercion is a concern.


4643 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2153

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 2102062 5-Oct-2018 11:10
One person supports this post
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

[ Its already done online, so at risk of the vagaries of the insecure internet.

 

 

 

 

Through a relatively small number of computers that can be issued, secured, controlled and monitored by the relevant authorities which do not have to traverse the public internet, versus 3 million random devices.





iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


13545 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2448

Trusted

  Reply # 2102064 5-Oct-2018 11:15
Send private message quote this post

SaltyNZ:

 

tdgeek:

 

[ Its already done online, so at risk of the vagaries of the insecure internet.

 

 

 

 

Through a relatively small number of computers that can be issued, secured, controlled and monitored by the relevant authorities which do not have to traverse the public internet, versus 3 million random devices.

 

 

Fair point, if they never leave the network providers networks, and are not on the internet, public or not. Are you referring to VPN?


27120 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6562

Moderator
Trusted
Biddle Corp
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2102077 5-Oct-2018 11:35
Send private message quote this post

MileHighKiwi: Why does evething have to be digital these days? I enjoy walking to the school on election day with my family and casting my vote. Heck, even on holiday I have made the effort to find a polling booth. If people find that too difficult I'm not these are people I want having a say.

 

What happens when the me me me me me millennial generation all decide to vote online for the fun of it picking some random person that their friends all talked about on Facebook just for lols? .. And then that person gets elected and are useless?

 

I know it's not really that different to people voting like sheep for the same GWRC people (maybe they won't now they realise they're all useless), but there are unintended social consequences.

 

 

 

 


2484 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1218

Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 2102092 5-Oct-2018 12:04
Send private message quote this post

itxtme:

 

Frankv I think you have no idea how much work and advice is given to the politician that fronts a policy that is implemented.  What you are suggesting is like having the workers set the strategy for a business, and removing the CEO and board..  Good luck with that

 

 

Given that the whole point of democracy is that the people of the country get to have a say in their future, why shouldn't "the workers set the strategy for a business"? One huge benefit of direct democracy is that it precludes what you describe, so that biased, probably self-serving, advice can't be given to a few decisionmakers by a few bureaucrats or a powerful clique.

 

I'm not saying that the CEO and board needs to be removed entirely. Just that they no longer get to set the overall policy... instead, they get to implement and govern the policy that the people select.

 

And, what can I say, Switzerland has had good luck with that for longer than New Zealand, or indeed the current British Parliamentary system, has existed.

 

 


4643 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2153

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 2102093 5-Oct-2018 12:05
Send private message quote this post

tdgeek:

 

Fair point, if they never leave the network providers networks, and are not on the internet, public or not. Are you referring to VPN?

 

 

 

 

Either a VPN or better still a private APN that is plumbed in direct from the carrier to whoever is providing the back-end.





iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


4643 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2153

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 2102097 5-Oct-2018 12:16
Send private message quote this post

sbiddle:

 

What happens when the me me me me me millennial generation all decide to vote online for the fun of it picking some random person that their friends all talked about on Facebook just for lols? .. And then that person gets elected and are useless?

 

 

 

 

Same as when the Boomers vote for whoever they've been discussing on Facebook, but much better looking.





iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
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.