real-mccoy

I did try to understand the logic behind the new system. I believe I understand, however, I can't really see the benefit of it. I still trust the old school way, simple, straight forward. I vote for t ...
fibbi 發表於 2009-5-7 11:28

And how is that different from marking a "1" on your vote?  I don't think it's mandatory for the voter to rank all candidates.

"Voters can rank every candidate in their constituency if they want to, but the rankings are just instructions on how the single vote gets counted."

daimo

i don't know about anyone else .. but I have trouble keeping track of the candidate's names.. a couple of them and rank them?

i'll probably end up picking the party instead.

rainbow-davie

is it same as (or very similar to) HK system?

BiscottiGelato

The current first past the post system have tremendous flaws tho. Just look at the last provincial election. Green party have almost 10% of the popular vote, with 0 seats, while Liberal have ~46% of the popular vote but with 90% of the seats. First past the post is ridiculous and it does not give a result that reflects people's choice. I am not saying STV is the best system but first past the post is one of the worst. STV is definately the lesser of the two evils here.

On the other hand, the argument where STV vote count is 'too complicated' is not even an argument. There are so many things in this world that your very life depends on that are ridiculously complicated. That's not a reason to not use them. You use whatever's better, not whatever you understand better. One'd have to give up almost every aspect of life if complexity is the devil that we want to avoid like a plague.

ravemother

The current first past the post system have tremendous flaws tho. Just look at the last provincial election. Green party have almost 10% of the popular vote, with 0 seats, while Liberal have ~46% of t ...
BiscottiGelato 發表於 7-5-2009 16:22

good say

Guy

STV is a total waste of time and money for going back and forth to see who is won and who is not. ( i know they might use computers but if there is chance of an appeal and count by person)

the old system.. is one count... compare the numbers and done

CWong

NO!

rtfwong

First of all, our current voting system is NOT fine.  If everything was running smooth, why did the government ask the voters if they wanted change?  The current system originates from the 12th century, when only rich man can vote!  I'd say it is about time for a change.  

For the people that says "You should vote for the current system unless you understand EVERYTHING about BC-STV".  Well, explain to me how each electron moves in your computer before posting a reply.  What is important here is that the system is easy for the voters to use.  All the voters have to do is to put down 1,2,3, etc. for people they like.   We have been doing this since grade 1!  You don't have to rank them all, you can rank just 1 person if you like.  The system tries its best to give you one of your top choices, so more people gets a representative they wanted.  Right now, if about half your neighbors disagree with you, you and the other half of your neighbors "loses" and gets nobody for the next four years!  Government is not a GAME, it is about hearing what voters have to say.  STV gives voters back their say.  It is a voting system chosen by the voters, for the voters.  I'd say YES for sure.

rtfwong

i don't know about anyone else .. but I have trouble keeping track of the candidate's names.. a couple of them and rank them?

i'll probably end up picking the party instead.
daimo 發表於 2009-5-7 11:59

...and you can with STV.  The parties will be listed clearly, so you can simply go 1,2,3,4 for everyone in your favorite party.  What's even better, if you KNOW that Mr.Dumbass from your preferred party is a dumb ass, then you can vote for everyone EXCEPT Mr.Dumbass from your party.  BC-STV helps keep dumbasses out of our government!

yuusaku

YES