h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Greetings all,

I am a refugee from other boards where using the word election has now apparenly become a thing of naughtiness. I suppose using refugee may also soon be barred as a politically divisive term, so I'd better be careful!

As the general climate seems to be one of fear as opposed to any sort of robust debate we can presume that these message board rules will be applied over generously and thereby frustrating and stifling any comment of value in preference of a liberal bland political correctness. And you want to know why people become so apathetic about politics....?

Regards, GG.

"As the general climate seems to be one of fear as opposed to any sort of robust debate we can presume that these message board rules will be applied over generously and thereby frustrating and stifling any comment of value in preference of a liberal bland political correctness."

Why don't you try posting your 'robust' opinions on the coming election here and seeing what actually happens rather than decending into lazy generalisations?

It beats the moratorium we had on mentioning the Iraq invasion while it was going on. Post away! Only don't call anybody a rude name! There can be plenty of softspoken attacks that are perfectly devastating . . .

Thats my point,
All we are left with is generalisations. I have posted opinions and had them removed for 'sloganeering' or for being partisan. How can an election be discussed without mentioning the parties and the specifics of their policies?

Regards, GG.

Well as someone said try us, it might be ok on hootoo and if it is not then you can whinge.

Hi GG,

As you know, the BBC is in a very tricky position when it comes to politics. We have to maintain a balanced approach to reporting and to what's known as 'user-generated content' to ensure it isn't hi-jacked.

But surely it's possible to discuss the issues that affect you without needing to target or attribute parties? The issues that affect, say, the Health service are ones that span many governments, not just the most recent one. The ideals the led to the creation of The Welfare State and the issues that we now face are not down solely to one party if more than one party has been in power in the last 60 years and have had the chance to reverse any decisions they felt have been wrong for the country.

What we're looking for on h2g2 is discussion about the issues themselves. What are your ideals for the future of this country?

It's easy to avoid sloganeering if you provide a balanced view of the issue. If it's a one-sided rant then of course we'll have to reconsider it, and we're not looking to silence one opinion if it's in the middle of an on-going discussion either if it's a fair addition to the debate.

As others have said, if you phrase your posting carefully, and consider how it might be perceived by someone with an opposing or slightly different view, it all makes for a much more interesting discussion in the long run - one that will have value beyond just the current election.

And of course, the BBC isn't the only organisation providing the means to discuss the issues during the next month.

Good afternoon SGG,

Nice to find another refugee from the POV Boards we seem to be 'banned' from!

My Issues

I voted Labour in '97 because the then Tories were , stale, tired, and to be honest there was too much sleaze going on.

Now I will not vote New Labour again. I feel totally let down by Teflon Tony,who promised everything, including no tax rises, no sleaze { I resist making a list], and above all Education,Education, Education.

What did we get, we got 66 tax rises, filthy hospitals, demoralised teachers, impossible kids who now have glamorous labels to say they have a 'disorder' , no NHS Dentists for miles ,students with enormous debts before they ever get a job because of Top Up Fees [ something else TT wasn't going to introduce], and a war we didn't want and were led into on a false prospectus.

So we attack a country in which the innocent citizens have no argument with us and who pose no threat to us whatsoever, and kill thousands of them.

Do I believe New Labour ? NO, and never will again.

Rant over
Novo

My issues are that I simply do not trust any politician. The last time I voted was 1979 - and since then, all I have ever seen is politicians of all shades saying and doing anything to cling to, or get into, power.

I am totally and utterly disenfranchised and no faith whatsoever in any of the main parties standing. The only weapon I seem to have at my disposal is not to play the grubby game and abstain.
I just wonder how large the “Non Turnout” has to be before the suits stand up and take notice, which is probably never.
They will continue to slap each other on the back, lie cheat and steal their way into power and then bemoan the “Apathetic” public for not voting. I prefer to think that not voting is actually registering a vote of utter disdain for the whole sorry lot of them………….

The_Doctor: you may want to take a look at F2045034?thread=621403 for the argument that spoiling your ballot is a better way of protesting than not voting.

"I just wonder how large the “Non Turnout” has to be before the suits stand up and take notice, which is probably never.
They will continue to slap each other on the back, lie cheat and steal their way into power and then bemoan the “Apathetic” public for not voting. I prefer to think that not voting is actually registering a vote of utter disdain for the whole sorry lot of them…………."

By just not voting you are nogt making a statement just being apathtic.

Politician and the media will always regard not voting as apathy. If you spoil your ballot paper you are showing that you are not just lazy but you cannotv bring yourself to vote for any of them.

No matter how low turnout was I doubt they would ever do anything. If 40% of people wrote "None of the above" on their papers then they would have to do something.

Here in Ireland we are considering electronic voting (why, when all we need is electronic vote *counting*, I don't know). One of the arguments brought against electronic voting is that it leaves no way of spoiling your vote.

This to me is ridiculous. A spoiled vote is not read by anyone who could do anything about the issues. You might as well write to Santa Claus.

But surely the probelms faced by the NHS are the knock-on effect of previous governments too?

(and can we not reduce these discussions to namecalling, please? The rules do state no discussion of individuals. This is to help us maintain balance.)

How do you count votes electronically?

Wasn't this the chads thing that screwed up Florida?

Mol

Theres a question as to wether the floria thing was an accident, there is certainly grounds for an argument that the test of the systems (to see if it were bias) was flawed.

I think if you have electronic voting you need to make the machines and the code freely available to whomever wants them after the electons (you do not want to hand out the code beforehand :D) That way theres no way anyones going to get away with electronic fraud.

Runining a paper is extremely important. It is the difference between someone who thought the polling station was a long way to walk and someone who wanted to say that the whole systems a mess and they can't bring themself to vote for anyone. If you belive that you can't vote for anyone in this political climate stand up and be counted! Go and register your complaint. I doubt very much that a 40% ruined paper outcome would be attributed to poor penmanship (unless educations gone further than I suspected :P)

Hello AO!

The Florida fiasco was pre-electronic. The chads were half-punched holes in a mechanical voting machine; you pulled a lever to punch holes in paper, only it seems if you didn't pull hard enough the holes were not clean.

Since then Florida used electronic voting machines and guess what? The results were seriously suspect (withdrawn candidates getting sizeable votes and so on).

America has recognised that papers are necessary, for the purpose of recounting. Ireland has recognised the same, after spending some millions on voting machines that were never used.

A vote counting machine would work like an envelope-reading machine. Here in hi-tech Ireland we do not have Zip or postal codes, because the post office has machines that read the handwritten address (and they work).

The effect of a vote counting machine is that the count is quick and each interested party could be allowed put the papers through their own counting machine, identifying all disputed votes which could then be pulled out and adjudicated publicly.

It would be particularly helpful to us since we use Proportional Representation, which requires second preferences, third, and so on, to be considered as candidates pass the required quota or are eliminated. This is a laborious process by hand, but would become pretty much instant with counting machines. It would also be fairer, as the surplus of a winning candidate would be counted as the proper proportion of *all* their second preferences, not just those papers that happen to be left over once enough have been credited to his/her vote.

If electronic voting were to be used (God forbid) then the code should be made public *before* the vote. Code for a counting machine is about the simplest code to write, and the machines could be made with severely restricted memory to prevent secret code being slipped in. The reason this won't be done is pure technocracy. A student could write the code, it could be verified by academics, no copyright should attach to it.

However it's not necessary: paper and a paper counter is all we need.

Ruining a paper is extremely important? In your dreams. Legally, the candidates elected by those who vote. Non-voting does not place any sort of claim for your opinion.

To change this, vote in somebody who will change it. Otherwise you are saying "I accept somebody else's candidate but "

Greetings Jimster,

I understand the BBC has some difficulties due to the nature of its constitution and the election following on resonably closely to the grand farce which was Hutton but...

There is no more important issue at stake at the moment than the nature of the party system istelf and the relative posturing and behaviours of the respective proponents. The 'issues' that they tout as important are played as mere political footballs, enticements with which to ensure that they are able to gain or maintain their own power in society.

The NHS has always been and will always be a rationing system whose problems will never be resolved whatever the parties care to promise us in the coming weeks. The value of education in this country is non existent as long as its sole focus is to produce good little consumer units rather than human beings and stuff like immigration as an issue is pure sensationalist vote-grabbing, pronounced with mythology and racism as its central theme.

How can you discuss any issue in an election without attributing parties? The logical conclusion of that which you are suggesting is that the issues should/could be discussed on any of your other message boards. In that instance why have you bothered to create these special sites for election discussion?

...and this is what I mean by the general climate of fear that is pervading our society. People afraid to go into hospital because of disproportionate scare stories about 'super-bugs', people terrified of younger people because of hysterical reporting of loutish behaviour, fear of peoples of differing skin colour because of negative stereotyping in immigration reporting and finally the BBC terrified that member of the public might say something on a message board that will get them into trouble with the government.

Regards, GG.

Just wanted to sya that I did read the post regarding spoiling your paper, and all the arguments for doing so. It was very good and made its point very well, so I went home and re-thought all my reasons for not voting. Having now done that, I do realise that my intial reasons for not voting (Do not trust anyone, etc, etc) do not hold up as particularly valid.
On the other hand, it did make me realise that I genuinely do not care one jot who gets in and what they do. Where I live for example, it has been bullet proof Tory forever so there is really absolutely no point in getting involved at all. If that sounds like apathy, I am sorry and I suppose it is really. All I do know is that looking back, I can honestly say that I have not noticed one single party being in power that actually made me feel better off or more valued than any other.

It really is immensely liberating when you do decide that you do not want to take part ..............

A load off your mind?

To Jimsters Post No 12

What do mean by 'not reducing to name calling ?

We cannot have a sensible debate unless we know
1 Who we are talking to
2 Whom we are talking about.

Anything else would be like talking to an unknown about an unknown , in the dark, or have I misread you?

Hello again to Still Good Grief by the way.

Novo