Arkan Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 unfortunately, a lot of the people that don't vote, probably shouldn't. this type of incentive would bring out all the idiots. would anyone really want them deciding the fate of society? taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> One idiot's vote over another's? Would it really matter? "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 One idiot's vote over another's? Would it really matter? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you presuppose that everyone that votes is an idiot. the contrary is probably true. tak comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 One idiot's vote over another's? Would it really matter? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you presuppose that everyone that votes is an idiot. the contrary is probably true. tak <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Which contrary? Everyone that votes is not an idiot, or not everyone that votes is an idiot? Either way, yeah, I know. It was a joke. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofAnakin Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 I think it's a stupid idea. As one person in the article suggested, all it will do is get people voting who don't even know or care about the candidates just to get a shot at the money. I thought the entire reason for the vote was to allow people to select the *best* person for the job. With this, I can see the majority of people just picking someone at random. "Console exclusive is such a harsh word." - Darque"Console exclusive is two words Darque." - Nartwak (in response to Darque's observation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pidesco Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 One idiot's vote over another's? Would it really matter? you presuppose that everyone that votes is an idiot. the contrary is probably true. tak Everyone is in some way or another, an idiot. Everyone. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian touristI am Dan Quayle of the Romans.I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.Heja Sverige!!Everyone should cuffawkle more.The wrench is your friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveThaiBinh Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 I thought the entire reason for the vote was to allow people to select the *best* person for the job. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually, no it isn't. It's nice if you do end up with the best person, but the point of the vote is that you end up with someone that everyone can accept, irrespective of their talents. They won the vote, therefore they have legitimacy, and people will (up to a point) accept the laws they make even if they didn't support them. After all, if I don't agree with what the current guy does, I can always campaign to unseat him at the next election. But if low voter turnout persists in the long term, it can undermine this legitimacy in many peoples' eyes. The guy at the top scraped through with barely one in five people actually voting for him, so what right does he have to start passing stupid laws and restricting our freedoms? Yes, I do mean you, Mr. Blair. :angry: "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofAnakin Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 Actually, no it isn't. It's nice if you do end up with the best person, but the point of the vote is that you end up with someone that everyone can accept, irrespective of their talents. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually what I meant was people should be voting for who *they* think is the best person for the job, even if that person isn't. Whereas with the Arizona proposal, people won't even be voting for someone they necessarily think will do a good job, but just picking a name at random just to qualify for the giveaway. "Console exclusive is such a harsh word." - Darque"Console exclusive is two words Darque." - Nartwak (in response to Darque's observation) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 someone that everyone can accept<{POST_SNAPBACK}> actually, not even that. more often than not, it is someone that the plurality can accept. never is it someone everyone can accept and only rarely the majority. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 Which contrary? Everyone that votes is not an idiot, or not everyone that votes is an idiot? not everyone that votes is an idiot. Either way, yeah, I know. It was a joke. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i figured that much. otherwise, you'd have had to lump yourself in there one way or another. heck, you'd even have to lump hades in as an idiot and we all know what... oh, wait. nevermind. bad analogy. (need the pokey emoticon) taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 Which contrary? Everyone that votes is not an idiot, or not everyone that votes is an idiot? not everyone that votes is an idiot. Either way, yeah, I know. It was a joke. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i figured that much. otherwise, you'd have had to lump yourself in there one way or another. heck, you'd even have to lump hades in as an idiot and we all know what... oh, wait. nevermind. bad analogy. (need the pokey emoticon) taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I take my idiocy to heart. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 ooh... where'd you get that? taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 ooh... where'd you get that? taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Another forum. Just check the properties. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taks Posted August 7, 2006 Share Posted August 7, 2006 ooh... where'd you get that? taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Another forum. Just check the properties. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> i remember we had it at missy's lair, but it's not in the "clickable smilies" list here and i'm too lazy to insert things unless they're automatic! thanks, however. taks comrade taks... just because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now