![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Europe, books, maps and snails—MOAR linkspam
A nice little mix of stuff in this lot, though the politics averse amongst you should be warned that with elections next week there's a fair bit on that, though not much of it is serious.
-
There are elections next week across the UK. In Britain, the votes are counted using the D'Hondt closed list PR system. This is one of the few electoral systems I've encountered I consider to be worse than the one we use for Westminster, when you get critics attacking "PR", they're having a go at this pile of arse, which no one sane suggests for Westminster (and Labour had to force through the Lords after a lot of opposition). If you're not sure who to vote for, and don't want to spend too much time thinking about it, go out and vote either Lib Dem or Green; there's a small chance the BNP could win a seat in the North West. Giving Nick Griffin a tax funded salary and the ability to hire a bunch of staff just doesn't appeal. It's unlikely he'll get in, but it could happen. So just go vote, please? Even if the system is arse, the EU parliament does actually have power these days, even if it's not as much as would be liked.
-
Not a bad bit of viral marketing this: what happens when the stuff on the display screen starts falling over. A nicely animated product catalogue as it slowly blows itself up.
-
I pretty much agree with this. Most of us writing our own personal blogs and journals are copying the old small press pamphleteers and chain letter writers. We're just doing it with better technology. Most of the established newspapers grew out of various small presses—the biggest blogs online now have copied this model, bringing in lots of individuals to create a more coherent whole.
-
Some of them really are a bit daft, yes, but still worth thinking about. What the antis always seem to miss is that most supporters of EU membership also constantly argue for reform of the system. That it's a bit crap isn't disputed, how to improve it is. Bit like everything else in life really.
-
A UKIP campaign slogan that doesn't make sense and is based on unfounded and uncosted hyperbole? really? Never would've guessed.
-
There are Euro elections due. One of the issues the EU legislates on is software patents, the Free Software Foundation thinks we should ask the candidates their views on this. Makes sense to me, go do it...
-
The underdog can always win if enough effort is put in. Being able to put that effort in is the main barrier. Does this apply to any walk of life, if at all?
-
Makes sense to me: a successful web technology will have cute cats, porn and activism. If it doesn't have a mix of the three, something isn't working right.
-
This, however, is one of the crazier ideas for solving the EU governance issue—when the paranoid fringes talk about 'plots to break up Britain'? This is the sort of thing they're referring to. But, y'know, interesting idea, even if he does make godawful beer.
-
Apparently from a Spitting Image annual from the mid 80s. It's really quite funny and rather accurate. Note to those supporting Cameron's modern Conservative party (or even those that can remember Major). Yes, Thatcher's Tories really were like this. Some of them still are. That the majority of MPs after the next General Election will be 'untainted' by this association doesn't mean those of us that can remember will trust them.
-
If your identity has been used by a fraudster, and you're required to log all your movements, the authorities will keep trying to arrest you. And a national mandatory identity scheme WILL get cracked by a fraudster almost instantaneously. WebOfEvil shares a personal anecdote
-
Dear Warner. Getting YouTube to remove your subsidiaries officially posted music vids because they infringe your copyright means that people won't see your videos. You know, the ones you paid for to advertise your product? Is there a chance that, at some time soon, the recording industry will grow up and get a clue?
-
Paging George! This bloke seems perfect for you girl...
-
Heh—banning books from teens makes them more likely to want to read them. So a kid running a library of banned books is encouraging her schoolfriends to read more. Cool
-
I never did understand the whole "he'll grow out of it" approach to my liking of SF and fantasy when I was a teen, why would I WANT to grow out of it? Just because I like Asimov and Stross doesn't mean I can't appreciate Nabokov (who wrote some SF anyway) or the likes, just as liking Therapy doesn't prevent me also liking Dvorak or Gershwin. Silly elitist snobs. Still, at least we're winning...
-
Really. It's a hoversnail. It's cool. Go look.
no subject
This surprises me.
Having a quick look through your old posts, I see you linked to your post here. I like MM-STV in general, in principle, and I'm not familiar with reasons why it might work especially well for one level of government and not work so well for another. I imagine I would be pursuaded by arguments as to how it is more appropriate for the UK elections to the European Parliament than the system we're using next week.
However, returning to the first para, I don't see why FPTP and the results it generated in the 1994 European Elections would be preferable to the system used in 2004 (and next week).
no subject
I'm very strongly in favour of STV (the MM is superflous), I consider it to be the best electoral system I've seen. I consider closed list PR to be the worst that's seriously in use anywhere (and Israel and Italy, both the perpetually summoned anti-PR-argument countries, use variants of closed list PR).
In FPTP, the tactical decision for who to vote for is fairly easy—you've got a pretty good idea of who the top two candidates are, and most voters will vote for one of those two.
In list PR, the tactical decision is much harder—are the Lib Dems likely to get a 2nd seat (or lose the one they've got)? Except in London, the polling seems to indicate no. Are the BNP likely to? In the NW, maybe. Could the Greens? Perhaps.
If I vote Lib Dem, my vote may be completely wasted (this is very likely in Yorkshire). But the Greens might just scrape an MEP. Or the BNP might just beat them into 5th.
Insanely complex tactical decision for a lot of people, because it's not preferential and votes can be wasted.
I like preferential systems because (unless they're Hennessy's Bloody Stupid System) you can't waste your vote. I dislike any system that makes a wasted vote more likely. D'hondt makes a vote more likely to be wasted than FPTP, and gives more power to hierarchies (the top of the list for Labour and Conservative has a seat, beginning and end of debate, I dislike that).
no subject
Let me check my understanding. If everyone genuinely votes their first preference then the system works to some extent, but if sufficiently many people deliberately conceal their first preference in an attempt to finesse the distribution of later seats then results become unpredictable. You make it sound like it's a system that works best with either relatively few positions to be divided, so the incentive to vote tactically is weak, or relatively many positions to be divided, so the effects of tactical voting are likely to be much smaller - and some of the larger UK Euro-constituencies have hit an unsweet spot in the middle!
I can see your arguments in favour of open lists and against closed ones.
no subject
Well, sort of, yes.
But how do you define 'preference' when you're only allowed one choice out of many? The current party system is a result of FPTP, the parties all exist in order to compete for power at Westminster, all other elections are secondary (which is partially why you get local issue parties like Kidderminster Health Concern and similar).
I'm a member of the Lib Dems because I want to change the westminster system—when it comes from Europe, I'm torn between them and Libertarse, except a) I don't trust Ganley or his money and b) they're not going to get anywhere.
My first preference is for all the MEPs to be Lib Dems. That isn't going to happen. My next preference is not to have a BNP MEP taking my money and speaking 'on my behalf'. Voting against a BNP candidate is as valid a reason to chose my first preference, I don't think I'm 'concealing' it, I'd rather no Lib Dems and no BNP than some Lib Dems and a BNP, but D'Hondt means that Green votes are potentially wasted if they don't get in, and excess Lib Dem votes are wasted if they don't get a 2nd MEP.
A preferential system solves that immediately.