[SGVLUG] Web Archive Voting Results.

[serross at ix.netcom.com]

Dustin,

With your long dissertation, you promoting more responses.

SER

-----Original Message-----
From: Dustin <laurence at alice.caltech.edu>
Sent: Sep 19, 2005 3:12 PM
To: "SGVLUG Discussion List." <sgvlug at sgvlug.net>
Subject: Re: [SGVLUG] Web Archive Voting Results.

On Mon, 19 Sep 2005, Hershel Remer wrote:

> Our friend Terry writes:
> 
> > Even in US presidential elections we don't trash the results just because
> > less than half the populace voted.
> 
> 
> But how do we determine the intention of those who submitted pregnant chads?

I was trying to get out of this thread because I think it grown utterly
pointless, but this is a matter of process that deserves a comment.

Politics is a *very* bad example to appeal to.  To be brutally honest, we
couldn't care less about the intentions of those who choose not to vote in
a political election, or rather whether we care or not we do not lift a
finger to reflect their (unknown) preferences.  They were given the
Freedom to vote, but they chose to exercise their Freedom not to vote and
therefore have no voice.

Political freedom guarantees you the choice to vote, it does not guarantee
that your opinion matters if you did not vote (in fact, I claim that every
mechanism designed to do the latter would destroy actual Freedom).  It
guarantees you representation chosen by a known process, it does not
guarantee that your opinion will influence the nature or quality of that
representation if you exercise your Freedom not to vote or otherwise
participate in that process.

(Worse, it doesn't even guarantee equal representation--it only guarantees
a predictable, open mechanism.  Some people suffering from this confusion
have been unhappy about the idea that a president might be elected with
less than half the popular vote, but the fact is that the
mechanism--involving electors not quite proportional to population,
winner-take-all, gerrymandering, and the like--was followed and that is
what Freedom requires.)

Politics has to be that way because there is too much at stake.  We can
afford to be nicer about guessing on behalf of the silent majority in a
nice small group like the LUG, and I'm not opposed to that, but I wouldn't
suggest ever appealing to political rules.  If we were using those rules,
everyone can just shut up because the announced mechanism was followed and
the decision is made.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled interminable discussion.

Dustin