Jump to content

Experiment in direct democracy


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 519
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

For a politician to rely on an internet poll to decide how to vote in Tynwald shows either huge naivety about the reality of the internet or incredibly poor judgement.

I think Stinky was just having a laugh. Though surely in a direct democracy if 51% of us say you should get a haircut, you should.

It appears Gawnes quest for democratic credibility know's no bounds and an experiment on his democracy site will lead to a vote on actual proposals in Keys.

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/experiment-in-direct-democracy-1-8009814

Rest assured the day after that vote is done details of all the fake accounts set up by various people on there together with screen shots and user account details will be posted on here. You cannot add any credibility to this movement whatsoever when you have no controls in place over multiple users and other questionable accounts you register and allow to vote and therefore determine policy. Also when you don't handle people's data properly and in observance of the guidance provided in relation to the Data Protection Act.

From what I hear the Twitter experience on Friday is lining up to be interesting too. Stick to granny farming. The last time a democratic Facebook group was set up about the Promenade plans you chose to ignore the feedback when it suited you.

I've registered on it. Haven't voted. Everything is public so how can data be leaked? Nutter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see such enthusiastic comment, thanks all!

Just to note, it has been quite publicly stated that this is an experiment, the data which is generated this week will be non binding, and fake accounts are being filtered out.

 

Have a nice day everyone.

 

J.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great to see such enthusiastic comment, thanks all!

Just to note, it has been quite publicly stated that this is an experiment, the data which is generated this week will be non binding, and fake accounts are being filtered out.

 

Have a nice day everyone.

 

J.

 

You can't prove any of that as you can't validate anything.

 

If the vote goes ahead details of all the fakes and all the fake votes will be published which will invalidate the credibility of any conclusions.

 

What a sad display of sock puppet democracy to attempt to validate failed political ideas.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Says someone using a sockpuppet. Lol

What do you have to hide from using your normal login?

Nobody on here is claiming to be heading up a "revolution" in voting and democracy. Nobody is claiming credibility in driving the voting process, and nobody is trying to hoodwink gullible idiots into an election campaign that is fundamentally flawed. Virtually every account on MF a sock puppet. You certainly wouldn't have any credibility to drive a vote in Tynwald from any of the rubbish posted by anonymous avatars on here. But to claim credibility for democracy.im when it has none and when it makes cursory checks to validate whether people who vote on the site even exist is laughable. It has no credibility whatsoever. Very much like Gawne who has serially failed to listen to anyone in the last 10 years yet seems to believe he's the saviour of Manx democracy. You couldn't make it up. It's laughable. 147 registered on the site at least 50 of whom are probably fakes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not debating the merit of direct online democracy. I've publicly said to James I disagree with the concept. Still, why are you hiding behind a sockpuppet? Seems fishy to me.

Nobody is hiding behind anything. You refer to "someone" being a sock puppet that's pretty general really. Suffice to say there are plenty of people who have tried to get Gawne to listen to them in recent years. Especially over things like trams on the prom where he basically decided to ignore what members of the population were trying to say as it didn't suit his world view. Now it seems he has an army of sock puppets masquerading as a democracy movement who will direct him how to vote in Keys on matters of national importance. How laughable it that? There are lots of people happily proving that the whole registration process is fundamentally flawed because they have been ignored and over ruled for years by our self appointed saviour of democracy.

Edited by Weevil central
Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know why people are even entertaining the idea of direct democracy here, it is a corrupt, divisive, backward and manipulative system for any number of reasons.

 

Whilst some issues are straightforward, the vast majority of issues tend not to be clear cut, and direct democracy can conveniently ignore many of these complex issues, replacing analysis and clear thinking with emotion. The people voting very often will not have the expertise on many subjects that will come up. Expert input is often needed, and the consequences of actions on minorities impacted are likely to be ignored or potentially not even recognised. What might look like a sensible decision to some may have dire consequences for others. Ill-informed people tend to be polarised in their views, whereas we expect elected politicians (who we vote for) to debate properly and look at what is best for society as a whole.

 

Many people will not even get involved, especially if they do not feel strongly about something, or simply dont have the time, leaving all kinds of extreme viewpoints to be paraded as priorities. And what actually defines a majority in direct democracy terms anyway? Is this so called Experiment in Direct Democracy even likely to even be statistically significant, let alone provide proper feedback?

 

There are great swathes of the population isolated from direct democracy as they do not have the technology or access to the technology to take part in any proper debate. Half to two thirds of households dont even buy local papers.

 

Its corrupt because one minority group can push its own agenda by delivering just its own point of view, and if it can afford it, pay to deluge the population with its own propaganda to suit its needs, ignoring and simplifying issues to the extreme.

 

Everything will become a priority, because theres always someone championing for something, and with a limited budget not everything can be achieved.

 

We have a vote at the general election. Use that and pick the best people to outline their policies, produce a structured programme and debate the issues to the proper level. Feedback opinion can always be gathered through consultations, but not used as the deciding factor without proper and in-depth debate and the proper exploration of often complex issues.

 

Direct democracy should be thrown on the scrap heap, along with Phil Gawne.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont know why people are even entertaining the idea of direct democracy here, it is a corrupt, divisive, backward and manipulative system for any number of reasons.

 

Whilst some issues are straightforward, the vast majority of issues tend not to be clear cut, and direct democracy can conveniently ignore many of these complex issues, replacing analysis and clear thinking with emotion. The people voting very often will not have the expertise on many subjects that will come up. Expert input is often needed, and the consequences of actions on minorities impacted are likely to be ignored or potentially not even recognised. What might look like a sensible decision to some may have dire consequences for others. Ill-informed people tend to be polarised in their views, whereas we expect elected politicians (who we vote for) to debate properly and look at what is best for society as a whole.

 

Many people will not even get involved, especially if they do not feel strongly about something, or simply dont have the time, leaving all kinds of extreme viewpoints to be paraded as priorities. And what actually defines a majority in direct democracy terms anyway? Is this so called Experiment in Direct Democracy even likely to even be statistically significant, let alone provide proper feedback?

 

There are great swathes of the population isolated from direct democracy as they do not have the technology or access to the technology to take part in any proper debate. Half to two thirds of households dont even buy local papers.

 

Its corrupt because one minority group can push its own agenda by delivering just its own point of view, and if it can afford it, pay to deluge the population with its own propaganda to suit its needs, ignoring and simplifying issues to the extreme.

 

Everything will become a priority, because theres always someone championing for something, and with a limited budget not everything can be achieved.

 

We have a vote at the general election. Use that and pick the best people to outline their policies, produce a structured programme and debate the issues to the proper level. Feedback opinion can always be gathered through consultations, but not used as the deciding factor without proper and in-depth debate and the proper exploration of often complex issues.

 

Direct democracy should be thrown on the scrap heap, along with Phil Gawne.

Thanks Weevil.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are great swathes of the population isolated from direct democracy as they do not have the technology or access to the technology to take part in any proper debate. Half to two thirds of households dont even buy local papers. Its corrupt because one minority group can push its own agenda by delivering just its own point of view, and if it can afford it, pay to deluge the population with its own propaganda to suit its needs, ignoring and simplifying issues to the extreme

Yes but with this fatally flawed concept Gawne gets to only listen to the people he wants to listen too. Everyone else can fuck right off, like he wanted them to fuck right off over the Prom and Laxey Bridge. They are political robots to be deployed to only suit his agenda driven by a stupid and manipulated online platform. And worst of all who even knows who all of these people are and whether they even exist as the validation for registration on the site is so utterly piss poor. How on earth can they seriously allow any polls to determine a vote in Keys on the subjects on the site when the poll results have absolutely no substance whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...