Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hogpc!hogpd!keduh
From: keduh@hogpd.UUCP (D.HUDEK)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: re : voting  (fini)
Message-ID: <283@hogpd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 21-Feb-84 10:16:04 EST
Article-I.D.: hogpd.283
Posted: Tue Feb 21 10:16:04 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 22-Feb-84 02:04:36 EST
Lines: 69

<< hee hee hee >>

Boy, this is getting to be rather bizarre. Now people
think I'm a radical/reactionary/elitist/"master-race"-ist.
No, noone actually called me this, but it's getting that way.
It seems that I've nauseated people who think I want to play god
and sit in judgement in order to take away people's rights.
I'll put out one more article on this and then hopefully
shut up for good, at least on this subject.  :-)

First off, I was only semi-serious about the whole idea in the
first place. Why can't we discuss controversial subjects calmly
without getting so emotional and worked up ??  I volunteered to
take the less popular side for the purpose of discussion and then
whammy!, I have nauseated people. Wow, it must be nice to
only think about *correct* ideas... where can I get programmed 
like that ?  :-)  Damn, I'm doing it again... I'd better warn
you that I'm not too serious even in this article. Sorry if I 
offend you. [but not TOO sorry, everyone should be shocked and
offended every once in a while--- it makes you think     :-) 
although I apologize for descending into "name-calling" if I do ]

Anyway.... I'll try to get serious here for just a minute.
The basic idea proposed [using some criteria to allot  votes
to the citizens of a country] is nothing new or startling.
We do it in the USA today. Our criteria is age [ mainly ]
and the number of votes alloted is one. I was interested in
what people might think about changing either the criteria
or the number of votes alloted and thought it might be fun 
to discuss the reasons why. I used Mark Twain's story as a base
and then tried to defend his scheme.  I guess I should have made
myself clearer in the original article. Anyway, I found out
what most people thought. A few were willing to talk about
it but thought that the idea needed more careful thought
(establishing fair criteria is a tricky business), but most
people were disgusted at me for even thinking about a change
and seemed to think I was dangerous !!  C'mon... gimme a break !

I dunno... maybe I am a dangerous radical since I see nothing 
sacred in the status quo and am willing to entertain other ideas of
how things should be done { O NO !! go get the thought police :-) }.
For this topic at least, however, I think I would leave things
as they currently are (if someone made me god for a day   :-)  ).
There might be marginal benefits to be gained by changing the
voting allotment scheme from what it is today, but it's probably
not worth it. As I said in an earlier article, establishing 
fair criteria and doing the monitoring is a real pain in the ass. 
(No, I didn't say it in exactly those words, but that's what I
meant).

Well, that's all I had to say. I guess I'm going to have to work
on my endurance if I want to participate in the net [ I'll get 
my office mate to hurl insults at me twice daily and tell me I'm
a dangerous elitist maniac !!  :-)  ]      Cheerio !!

p.s.   I hereby apologize to anyone offended by my use of 
	the words Damn and ass instead of D*mn and a**.   :-)

p.p.s. To those who wondered, I am a male and my last name is
	my login spelled backwards.

      *   *
       \ /	
      _____ 
     /     \
     | ` ' |	{ihnp4!   or   pegasus!} hogpd!keduh
     |  >  |
     | \_/ |
      \___/