Again: Bullshit appeals to old authorities and making shit up to bolster your poor points that just lets you ignore and hide the lagging performance of your system and its flaws. Focus on effective solutions to the problems that have developed or you will fail due to corruption.
Bullshit appeals to old authorities who could not predict technological change and making shit up to bolster your poor points that just lets you ignore and hide the lagging performance of your system and its flaws. Focus on effective solutions to the problems that have developed or you will fail due to corruption.
So you are just another ignorant American, afraid of the others who you keep down intentionally. Enjoy your temporary dominance, because it won't last even a decade. The world is evolving and America can either reform its corruption or fail like the Ottomans.
You don't want to lose your special place as "informed" eh? You don't deserve a special place, no special importance. No one does. Your system is wrong as it is enables special advantageous treatment which by definition is not democratic. Only compulsory voting achieves maximum representation, and that is required to ensure minimum oppression. Compulsory voting is the only solution that actually embodies the foundations of democracy as a representative government.
Really? Well keep reading and think about it some. The problem with your existing system is that the issues selected for attention are those of the niche not representative of every voter, so naturally it seems that every voter is not interested. Rather your fault is failing to understand the numerous assumptions you make while claiming that I am failing to understand you. That is wrong, I disagree with your assumptions and so disagree with your claims. Your opposition to representation means that you are opposed to the foundation of democracy.
Also, seriously, look up "volunteer sample" and study some of the academic results. You will learn something important about why your existing system is inherently unrepresentative.
Ignoring reform because it is difficult is defeatist. Reform justified in increasing representation is all that supports democracy against all forces dismantling it. How did you miss the point of the article, and how did you misinterpret the point of my original post? Not everything is an essay, and advantages of compulsory voting outweigh disadvantages by far. You are simply conditioned to ignore them in favor of your existing system. Representation is all that matters in a democracy. Representation prevents abuses of power as no party or group can be abused for the benefit of another. Representation is the only force that legitimizes a democratic government as the common will is the only force with authority to enforce itself. Everything opposing representation opposes democracy itself.
You are claiming only "informed": should have votes, which is totalitarian in its very nature. The issues of every single voter are different from the interests of a self-selected volunteer sample. Look into sampling theory and you will start to understand why that doesn't work as barometer of anything for the total population. I started this thread, and my point was compulsory voting as solution to disenfranchisement from obstruction, which is the point of the article.
In such case the employer is required to pay the fine. We will not agree for seeing and valuing different objectives. Mine is maximum representation during campaigns and during elections, because all ruled are then ruled. Yours ignores the fact that in your existing system obstructions are used to disenfranchise targeted groups so that politicians don't even have to try to represent their interests. Your view is wrong and against the very foundation of democracy.
You don't get to choose which citizens can vote, that isn't democracy. Your understanding is flawed as well. Requiring all to vote means the interests of all must be the basis of a successful political campaign, not niche special interests that when served deprive others of representation.
Your choice to travel during vote means you choose to pay the fine. Your addition of a condition even "informed" isn't democracy. You are an autocrat in denial, which is the most dangerous type. Examine your faulty beliefs for your own benefit.
Not at all. Compulsory voting as a system is enforced uniformly by fines. The fact of compulsory voting requires that time is provided or employers pay the fines, guess which they prefer? Dictatorship comes from ignoring people, not counting their votes, not collecting their votes, or forcing their votes one way. Requiring that everyone present at a polling station and be offered a direct opportunity to vote is the maximum that can be done elicit the casting of a free vote. In fact it is what is required for democracy to function as the engine of the will of all governed.
How is the right not to vote more important the the right to vote without obstruction, and instead being enabled to vote by requirement? Democracy requires participation, that is the price of it. If you want government without representation you have a number of dictatorial options.
Only if you are lazy or stupid and don't care about the implications when deciding acceptable error levels. Much less than 0.18% is a problem when it concerns life and death decisions, like government. Much less of one type of Tylenol was contaminated with cyanide and it killed
Response was to "how do you prosecute?". Figure out the local terms on your own, these are general phrases that map to whatever jargon you prefer. Mail voting should be illegal as there is no way to ensure the voter votes. Require every citizen to vote through automatic registration, enforcement of visiting polling station and offering voting station. National obligation implies that voting becomes a holiday, and then that votes are targeted to that holiday. On last point, you don't understand government imposes its will on all people governed so then for democracy to function all people must have a direct vote in deciding that government. There are no exceptions.
Through individual registration at each polling station. I have seen US voting and names are collected just not compiled from all locations and compared for fine or notice. Advantages include requiring time off legal obligation of voting increasing availability and representation. Guess what democracy is based on?
Are you fucking autistic or something? Historical communications between the founders of a major company are important for the information they contain. That is lost now.
Language and communication for knowledge transfer is what that truly differentiates humans from animals; especially with writing and reading developed to save knowledge for future use. You should be fine with getting a lobotomy if you don't understand that, and otherwise you're a damn troll. Understanding how a major successful company forms and survives provides information that informs business research and management practice. That is the narrow application. Larger contexts apply for the now unknowable insights it contained. Loss of knowledge is a loss for humanity.
The vast majority of information in the world isn't accessible by internet access or database on a computer. Most real information requires physical access for investigation, and that is the case here. The information was cataloged but idiots who don't pay for things fantasize about immediate access. Do you all have some medical condition or something that makes you retarded? There is no excuse for people at all involved in information technology to not understand both. Idiots who hate history don't make it value-less, they just show off the limits of their overly-sheltered lives and stupidity.
The simple answer to these combined events. One shows the need for greater oversight with measurable damages, but politicians beholden to niche interests act contrary to that. This is more than unrepresentative of the majority of their actual constituents, it shows that they hold the interests of the few who benefit from the policy above those who voted for them. That can be changed though. Leave the corrupt to get votes only from the corrupt, and deprive them of all others.
Paranoia doesn't provide a solid revenue stream, the real target users must have a reason for paying for obscure features with no performance impact. That leaves two groups: spies and criminals. Spies have better systems provided by their governments. That leaves one group: criminals. There is some chance enabling fraud etc. conducted with computers could be a reason to seek this new "feature" but there are easier ways to obscure financial transactions. That sets aside one type of criminal customer whose activities rely on computer multimedia capabilities - pedophiles, as in the ones abusing and exploiting kids. Don't buy from this company, don't enable criminals. If you claim paranoia as motivation you just need to grow up. There are more effective ways to get information, and most involve simply arresting and beating you until you confess.
Social media use is a generational trend, not a societal one. In 5 years all social media could die off for any reason and nothing in the world would actually change. 24 news would need to find new filler or scale back and either solution would work fine. Otherwise it is just the kids born after the development of smart phones and tablets who can not understand a world reliant instead on productive communications, limited by context and the need to solve problems or plan for the future. Minutia of celebrity gossip belongs on the daily broadsheets in a check-out lane of a grocery store, not absorbing any portion of time for general work or actual social activities.
Slashdot Mirror
Again: Bullshit appeals to old authorities and making shit up to bolster your poor points that just lets you ignore and hide the lagging performance of your system and its flaws. Focus on effective solutions to the problems that have developed or you will fail due to corruption.
Bullshit appeals to old authorities who could not predict technological change and making shit up to bolster your poor points that just lets you ignore and hide the lagging performance of your system and its flaws. Focus on effective solutions to the problems that have developed or you will fail due to corruption.
So you are just another ignorant American, afraid of the others who you keep down intentionally. Enjoy your temporary dominance, because it won't last even a decade. The world is evolving and America can either reform its corruption or fail like the Ottomans.
You don't want to lose your special place as "informed" eh? You don't deserve a special place, no special importance. No one does. Your system is wrong as it is enables special advantageous treatment which by definition is not democratic. Only compulsory voting achieves maximum representation, and that is required to ensure minimum oppression. Compulsory voting is the only solution that actually embodies the foundations of democracy as a representative government.
Really? Well keep reading and think about it some. The problem with your existing system is that the issues selected for attention are those of the niche not representative of every voter, so naturally it seems that every voter is not interested. Rather your fault is failing to understand the numerous assumptions you make while claiming that I am failing to understand you. That is wrong, I disagree with your assumptions and so disagree with your claims. Your opposition to representation means that you are opposed to the foundation of democracy.
Also, seriously, look up "volunteer sample" and study some of the academic results. You will learn something important about why your existing system is inherently unrepresentative.
Ignoring reform because it is difficult is defeatist. Reform justified in increasing representation is all that supports democracy against all forces dismantling it. How did you miss the point of the article, and how did you misinterpret the point of my original post? Not everything is an essay, and advantages of compulsory voting outweigh disadvantages by far. You are simply conditioned to ignore them in favor of your existing system. Representation is all that matters in a democracy. Representation prevents abuses of power as no party or group can be abused for the benefit of another. Representation is the only force that legitimizes a democratic government as the common will is the only force with authority to enforce itself. Everything opposing representation opposes democracy itself.
You are claiming only "informed": should have votes, which is totalitarian in its very nature. The issues of every single voter are different from the interests of a self-selected volunteer sample. Look into sampling theory and you will start to understand why that doesn't work as barometer of anything for the total population. I started this thread, and my point was compulsory voting as solution to disenfranchisement from obstruction, which is the point of the article.
In such case the employer is required to pay the fine. We will not agree for seeing and valuing different objectives. Mine is maximum representation during campaigns and during elections, because all ruled are then ruled. Yours ignores the fact that in your existing system obstructions are used to disenfranchise targeted groups so that politicians don't even have to try to represent their interests. Your view is wrong and against the very foundation of democracy.
You don't get to choose which citizens can vote, that isn't democracy. Your understanding is flawed as well. Requiring all to vote means the interests of all must be the basis of a successful political campaign, not niche special interests that when served deprive others of representation.
Your choice to travel during vote means you choose to pay the fine. Your addition of a condition even "informed" isn't democracy. You are an autocrat in denial, which is the most dangerous type. Examine your faulty beliefs for your own benefit.
Not at all. Compulsory voting as a system is enforced uniformly by fines. The fact of compulsory voting requires that time is provided or employers pay the fines, guess which they prefer? Dictatorship comes from ignoring people, not counting their votes, not collecting their votes, or forcing their votes one way. Requiring that everyone present at a polling station and be offered a direct opportunity to vote is the maximum that can be done elicit the casting of a free vote. In fact it is what is required for democracy to function as the engine of the will of all governed.
How is the right not to vote more important the the right to vote without obstruction, and instead being enabled to vote by requirement? Democracy requires participation, that is the price of it. If you want government without representation you have a number of dictatorial options.
Your fantasy of arrest is what fuels your stupid rant, and your concept is flawed and wrong on that basis. Compulsory voting is enforced with fines.
Only if you are lazy or stupid and don't care about the implications when deciding acceptable error levels. Much less than 0.18% is a problem when it concerns life and death decisions, like government. Much less of one type of Tylenol was contaminated with cyanide and it killed
Response was to "how do you prosecute?". Figure out the local terms on your own, these are general phrases that map to whatever jargon you prefer. Mail voting should be illegal as there is no way to ensure the voter votes. Require every citizen to vote through automatic registration, enforcement of visiting polling station and offering voting station. National obligation implies that voting becomes a holiday, and then that votes are targeted to that holiday. On last point, you don't understand government imposes its will on all people governed so then for democracy to function all people must have a direct vote in deciding that government. There are no exceptions.
Through individual registration at each polling station. I have seen US voting and names are collected just not compiled from all locations and compared for fine or notice. Advantages include requiring time off legal obligation of voting increasing availability and representation. Guess what democracy is based on?
This is why the US needs to make voting compulsory and a federal obligation.
No, "that" meaning this you fucking moron. I imagine you're up for an election somewhere stupid soon, but for now you should fuck off!
Are you fucking autistic or something? Historical communications between the founders of a major company are important for the information they contain. That is lost now.
Language and communication for knowledge transfer is what that truly differentiates humans from animals; especially with writing and reading developed to save knowledge for future use. You should be fine with getting a lobotomy if you don't understand that, and otherwise you're a damn troll. Understanding how a major successful company forms and survives provides information that informs business research and management practice. That is the narrow application. Larger contexts apply for the now unknowable insights it contained. Loss of knowledge is a loss for humanity.
The vast majority of information in the world isn't accessible by internet access or database on a computer. Most real information requires physical access for investigation, and that is the case here. The information was cataloged but idiots who don't pay for things fantasize about immediate access. Do you all have some medical condition or something that makes you retarded? There is no excuse for people at all involved in information technology to not understand both. Idiots who hate history don't make it value-less, they just show off the limits of their overly-sheltered lives and stupidity.
The simple answer to these combined events. One shows the need for greater oversight with measurable damages, but politicians beholden to niche interests act contrary to that. This is more than unrepresentative of the majority of their actual constituents, it shows that they hold the interests of the few who benefit from the policy above those who voted for them. That can be changed though. Leave the corrupt to get votes only from the corrupt, and deprive them of all others.
Paranoia doesn't provide a solid revenue stream, the real target users must have a reason for paying for obscure features with no performance impact. That leaves two groups: spies and criminals. Spies have better systems provided by their governments. That leaves one group: criminals. There is some chance enabling fraud etc. conducted with computers could be a reason to seek this new "feature" but there are easier ways to obscure financial transactions. That sets aside one type of criminal customer whose activities rely on computer multimedia capabilities - pedophiles, as in the ones abusing and exploiting kids. Don't buy from this company, don't enable criminals. If you claim paranoia as motivation you just need to grow up. There are more effective ways to get information, and most involve simply arresting and beating you until you confess.
Social media use is a generational trend, not a societal one. In 5 years all social media could die off for any reason and nothing in the world would actually change. 24 news would need to find new filler or scale back and either solution would work fine. Otherwise it is just the kids born after the development of smart phones and tablets who can not understand a world reliant instead on productive communications, limited by context and the need to solve problems or plan for the future. Minutia of celebrity gossip belongs on the daily broadsheets in a check-out lane of a grocery store, not absorbing any portion of time for general work or actual social activities.