[atlarge-discuss] Corrections

["Ron Sherwood" <sherwood@islands.vi>]

Please excuse this corrected copy of my previous message.  I stupidly sent the original without re-reading what I had typed, and sent a message with omissions that reversed the meaning of my text. This version is correct.

Sorry, Ron

Walter Schmidt wrote:

> From my point of view, if you do not vote for 11, and vote (say) for only
> four, all you are doing is letting someone else determine who are the
> "other 7"
>
> The concept of a "bullet vote" sounds like a concept one might foist on a
> group in an attempt to "steal the majority" of seats.

Exactly, Walter:

If there are 100 candidates, 90 of whom I do not know enough about to want them to represent me on our Panel,  why would you want me to damage your chance if electing a candidate that YOU want to be on the Panel, simply because I am expected to vote for 11 people?

You may really want # 99 but I, and possibly a few others, may vote for #98, not because we think she is the right person but because you feel that we have to vote for 11 candidates.  The result may well be that my (or our) votes caused the person that I did not want anyway, to be elected in place of the person that you really did want to see on the Panel.  I can think of no good reason for voting for a candidate that I do have any reason to see elected, but I am
very happy to see you elect anyone that you feel will be good for the job.

That my friend is democracy. To encourage people to vote for candidates that they don't know enough about to warrant their support (on the pretext that it is bad for someone else to choose their own representatives) does not
make for good representation.

Please explain to me how this could possibly amount to "stealing the majority of seats".

Regards, Ron