Poll: F.P.T.P or A.V.. This Thursday

FPTP or AV

  • FPTP

    Votes: 319 37.1%

  • AV

    Votes: 359 41.8%

  • Pfft, Will Still End Up Run By Crooks

    Votes: 181 21.1%
  • Total voters
    859
dante6491 said:
It is not more than one vote, it just seems like it. Do I want a kitkat? They are all sold out. How about a Mars bar? Sold out. Time out? In the end you still only get one chocolate bar, but you could choose again and again.

If it is not the candidate you want, then it is another go, then another then another. Just because you missed the first time, why should you get another attempt?
Click to expand...

If I was 30% sure I wanted a kitkat and 70% sure I wanted something else, it would be wise to consider the other options but this analogy doesn't really work as it's only taking into account one point of view, not a consensus.

BDEE said:
That is a bit of a facetious comment. Just because your viewpoint of something differs, you should not dismiss someone elses in a way that insinuates they are thick and do not understand it. People will view things differently, its not a case of not understanding the system, its a case of opinion on what it means.
Click to expand...

Apologies that that's how it came across but I was trying to be factual - people don't have more than one vote under AV. Sure, if your primary candidate is eliminated early and there's no winner then you'll have your other opinions taken into account in order of preference, but you'll only ever have one vote in each round.
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RDM
The thing is that one of them is the "different voters have a differing number of votes" which is purely an opinion thing so it is neither right nor wrong.

Mr Jack:
No, it's wrong. Different voters do not get different number of votes (excepting those who choose not to rank all candidates).


Mr Jack - You are one of those "You are entitled to your opinion, but mine is the right one", kinda guys aren't you.

It's kind of pointless having a debate with someone like you.

Most of this thread has been genuinely interesting for me to read being an "on the fencer", but your posts just make having a debate pointless since you do not appreciate that others have differing views which you simply dismiss as wrong.

Has made me lose interest now.
 
Looking at the poll results, under AV: FPTP may win if we count "Pfft, Will Still End Up Run By Crooks" second preferences :D
 
clv101 said:
Wow, this is about the most disappointed I've ever been with this forum.

Why is anyone thinking of FPTP? The two systems are very similar with the key difference being the AV solves the split vote problem that FPTP suffers from and allows people vote their true preference without having to think tactically.

It really is as simple as that, no more no less.
Click to expand...

I had to quote this because the same rings true for me - I'm incredibly surprised to see the poll results. I honestly fail to see why people would vote for FPTP - especially having seen some of the complete and utter drivel in the No2AV bumf that gets delivered. People can't honestly take those leaflets seriously, can they?
Right guys?
Guys?!
 
Antelopethy said:
I had to quote this because the same rings true for me - I'm incredibly surprised to see the poll results. I honestly fail to see why people would vote for FPTP - especially having seen some of the complete and utter drivel in the No2AV bumf that gets delivered. People can't honestly take those leaflets seriously, can they?
Right guys?
Guys?!
Click to expand...

Likewise the Yes2AV campaign has been next to useless. They seem to think that AV will stop expenses scandals and there will be less safe seats...
 
Luseac said:
Looking at the poll results, under AV: FPTP may win if we count "Pfft, Will Still End Up Run By Crooks" second preferences :D
Click to expand...

Funny that - Might end up with Pro AV voters changing thier mind and saying that the poll is clearly common opinion since AV (currently) has the highest number of votes. But that would make it so from being FPTP. Oooh if only we has the second choices of all those third optioners..... would certainly prove a point!

:D
 
FPTP. I think that the instinctive human nature of feeling the need to fill out all the boxes you are presented with is a big problem.

I imagine many voters will think "I must use all my options otherwise my vote is wasted :eek:" even if they in fact would actually not like their 2nd, 3rd or 4th choice to win - producing a really messed up result.
 
You do realise that people can cast a single preference? It's called 'plumping' when you just cast one preference for one party, and unlike in Australia, you can do that under the kind of AV we are being offered.
 
naffa said:
You do realise that people can cast a single preference? It's called 'plumping' when you just cast one preference for one party, and unlike in Australia, you can do that under the kind of AV we are being offered.
Click to expand...

I know people can, what I am saying is that people won't - even if they don't particularly want their 2nd, 3rd or 4th choices some people will still fill them out as it will appear that they will have more of a "say" that way.

Not everyone is as clued up as the average poster on here, and as a result can be really silly with their vote. I've seen people wanting to "win" at voting before, as in finding out which is the most popular party/candidate and voting for them purely based on the fact that they will then have "won". Giving people the option to spread their chance of "winning" will just make this worse.

I'm not saying it's a bad system, I'm saying people won't use the system properly.
 
naffa said:
You do realise that people can cast a single preference? It's called 'plumping' when you just cast one preference for one party, and unlike in Australia, you can do that under the kind of AV we are being offered.
Click to expand...

What Zefan is saying though is that it is human nature to need to fill out all the boxes anyway, regardless of whether they want to or not.
 
Castiel said:
What Zefan is saying though is that it is human nature to need to fill out all the boxes anyway, regardless of whether they want to or not.
Click to expand...

If people understand what they're doing, then that's not an issue. For example, I will never put a mark against the BNP, even it were preference number 8.

Once again we're back to the issue of "The populous are too stupid for AV!".
 
Random question; my housemate states that not voting in the referendum counts as a no vote, is that correct? Or will I have to get off my fat arse and go and vote no?*





*Disclaimer, I don't actually have a fat arse.
 
jidh007 said:
Random question; my housemate states that not voting in the referendum counts as a no vote, is that correct? Or will I have to get off my fat arse and go and vote no?*





*Disclaimer, I don't actually have a fat arse.
Click to expand...

No not voting counts as not voting.

the winner is chosen from the people that actually vote.



just like in the last general election only 65% of the eligible people voted, the other 45% are just ignored.

if they said the non voters counted as X then that party/decision would pretty much always win.




I guess this is some random Yes nutters (nutter because they're doing this not because they vote yes) way of trying to cost the noside a few votes.
 
Tefal said:
No not voting counts as not voting.

the winner is chosen from the people that actually vote.

just like in the last general election only 65% of the eligible people voted, the other 45% are just ignored.

if they said the non voters counted as X then that party/decision would pretty much always win.

I guess this is some random Yes nutters (nutter because they're doing this not because they vote yes) way of trying to cost the noside a few votes.
Click to expand...

I see, yes, I think you're last point is probably right. Bizarre. Oh well, we'll see!
 
I'm feeling super-lazy atm; does anyone want to give a link for the voting online bit? I might actually bother to vote if I don't have to go somewhere to do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom