|
Posted by 3D Peruna on September 13, 2007, 12:45 pm
Michael Bulatovich wrote:
> Ontario is facing a referendum in the upcoming provincial election that
> could alter the way representation in the parliament is achieved.
>
> The proposal is for 90 of 129 seats to be determined in the current "first
> past the post" system, and the balance to be proportional to party
> preference indicated on a separate line on the ballot.
>
> Here's the url:
> http://votredecision.ca/en_ca/default.aspx
>
> Anybody here living with a system like that? My sense is that it'll mean
> slightly more seats for the smaller parties like the NDP, Greens, Commies,
> etc., but via people who might not be electable themselves. Minorities
> governments will get more interesting too.
Methinks that something Wright said about competitions fits here:
[Architectural] Competitions have never yet given the world anything
worth having. […] Now, the reason is this—one reason, this isn’t the
only reason, in every competition that goes through, the committee is
first of all an average. […] Then, the committee goes through the
exhibit, picks out the best designs and the worst ones, and throws them
out. Why? Because they can’t get together on the best one. That one is
always a minority report. You see? The best ones have to go. The worst
ones have to go. Then there is the average. (May, 1949)
I would re-write it to say:
Democratic elections have rarely given the world anything worth having.
[…] Now, the reason is this—one reason, this isn’t the only reason, in
every election that goes through, the election is first of all an
average. […] Then, the people go through the candidates, picks out the
best people and the worst ones, and throws them out. Why? Because they
can’t get together on the best one. That one is always a minority
report. You see? The best ones have to go. The worst ones have to go.
Then there is the average. (May, 1949)
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap