Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Canada: Is the Gomery Inquiry going to bring down the Liberals?

Yakk · 11-28-2005, 08:30 AM

I don't see how a rejected comprimise absolves you of your actions afterwards?

"I want to shoot you in the head. I will offer a comprimise -- you give me your money, and I won't shoot you. Oh look what you made me do by rejecting my comprimise!"

Proportional Representation is tricky. I would not be willing to accept any PR system that gave parties (as opposed to MPs) more power than they have right now.

As it stands, if a party kicks an MP out of caucas, and the MP has the same support from voters, the MP gets to remain in parliament. MPs should be more beholden to their voters than to their party.

I also am against any voting system that is not human-verifiable at every stage. Any voting system that requires a computer to tabulate the votes has single-point-of-corruption issues.

More precicely, the virtue of our current system is that corrupting the voting system requires a conspiracy whose size is purportional to the number of votes corrupted. I want to maintain this feature.

Thirdly, locality of representation is important. Being a representative of "green party voters" is one thing, but that makes your constituancy nebulous. MPs should be geographically bound.

Can you generate any PR systems that have these properties?

The current FPTP system has many flaws. I don't want to replace the flaws of the current FPTP system with a system that lacks the virtues of the FPTP system.

11-28-2005, 08:30 AM	#132 (permalink)
Yakk Wehret Den Anfängen! Location: Ontario, Canada	I don't see how a rejected comprimise absolves you of your actions afterwards? "I want to shoot you in the head. I will offer a comprimise -- you give me your money, and I won't shoot you. Oh look what you made me do by rejecting my comprimise!" Proportional Representation is tricky. I would not be willing to accept any PR system that gave parties (as opposed to MPs) more power than they have right now. As it stands, if a party kicks an MP out of caucas, and the MP has the same support from voters, the MP gets to remain in parliament. MPs should be more beholden to their voters than to their party. I also am against any voting system that is not human-verifiable at every stage. Any voting system that requires a computer to tabulate the votes has single-point-of-corruption issues. More precicely, the virtue of our current system is that corrupting the voting system requires a conspiracy whose size is purportional to the number of votes corrupted. I want to maintain this feature. Thirdly, locality of representation is important. Being a representative of "green party voters" is one thing, but that makes your constituancy nebulous. MPs should be geographically bound. Can you generate any PR systems that have these properties? The current FPTP system has many flaws. I don't want to replace the flaws of the current FPTP system with a system that lacks the virtues of the FPTP system. __________________ Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.