Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1465 times:
Unfortunately, in my experiences, the ignorant do not know/think they are ignorant. So to them, they know enough to make conclusions, hence don't need to know any more info.
I think every ballot should have some kind of assessment test to evaluate each voter's knowledge of what or who they are voting for and weight their vote accordingly.
If people only vote because they think they have to and don't score well, either they will not vote or study harder next time.
As of a passing score, I don't know what would be appropriate. I'd say 100% and I'd make the test completely objective, requiring people to be critical of their favorites.
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
Sean1234 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 411 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1457 times:
No.
This is a democracy; every voice is heard. The talk of weighting votes is somewhat reminiscent of the 3/5 compromised this nation used long ago. You want to go back to that? Were blacks inferior to whites, only 3/5 of a person?
Though arguably the misinformed voter, however you want to define it, is a shortcoming of democracy. One hopes the majority opinion will be the "right one".
Vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 8200 posts, RR: 28 Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1445 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Quoting Lehpron (Thread starter): Unfortunately, in my experiences, the ignorant do not know/think they are ignorant.
Which means that EVERYONE could be ignorant, and NO ONE would know.
This is a democracy; every voice is heard. The talk of weighting votes is somewhat reminiscent of the 3/5 compromised this nation used long ago. You want to go back to that? Were blacks inferior to whites, only 3/5 of a person?
Though arguably the misinformed voter, however you want to define it, is a shortcoming of democracy. One hopes the majority opinion will be the "right one".
"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
NeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1445 times:
Who is ignorant in your view, may not be ignorant in mine or others people's mind. In my opinion, your idea is completely asinine and is in direct contradiction of how a democracy runs, one person, one vote. It seems that you would like to segregate people based on what your perceived view of ignorance is, a laughable idea at best.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7673 posts, RR: 18 Reply 6, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1437 times:
Based on the OPs statements, I hearby decree he should no longer be able to vote.
Poll taxes, qualification tests have all been declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court. And there is no such thing as a purely objective test. Never mind that we live in a democracy based upon the principle of one person, one vote.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
MBMBOS From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2561 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1437 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Thread starter): I'd say 100% and I'd make the test completely objective, requiring people to be critical of their favorites.
Objective? How do you ever make a test objective? According to whom?
And how ignorant must a person be before you disallow them to vote? Or, to put it another way, what level of comprehension must a person have in order to determine they are capable of making a decision?
And why set any sort of ignorance standard, by the way? Can you demonstrate, empirically, that voters have made poor decisions based on ignorance?
This is fraught with problems. The only example of anything like this in our history was literacy tests adminstered to voters. This was aimed, specifically, to exclude black voters in southern states.
It would become politicized in a second and we would never get to a point of agreement on how to test for ignorance.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1433 times:
Quoting Sean1234 (Reply 1): Though arguably the misinformed voter, however you want to define it, is a shortcoming of democracy. One hopes the majority opinion will be the "right one".
That's my point. Democracy is crippled when those that vote are misinformed. But, we are going to protect and defend their right to be stupid? Where are we headed when these people ARE the majority??
Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 3): Which means that EVERYONE could be ignorant, and NO ONE would know.
That is how you and anyone that agrees with you will see it. Are other ways of seeing it possible?
Quoting 777236ER (Reply 4): An arrogant, patronising and fascist view to take.
Elaborate. That statement is in fact your view of what I said, which means I cannot take responsibility for your interpretation. I cannot read your mind.
Quoting DesertJets (Reply 6): Based on the OPs statements, I hearby decree he should no longer be able to vote.
I don't anymore, I don't take sides and there are no parties that sound like they have my interests in mind.
Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 5): Who is ignorant in your view, may not be ignorant in mine or others people's mind
How democratic, majority viewpoint says what is right then? Who needs school when we have Wikipedia.
[Edited 2006-11-10 20:11:40]
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
NeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1418 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8):
That's my point. Democracy is crippled when those that vote are misinformed. But, we are going to protect and defend their right to be stupid? Where are we headed when these people ARE the majority??
Sorry King Lephron, I was not aware that you were so superior that it was up to you to decide that in your opinion the majority of people ignorant. Could you create a list of all the people that are allowed to vote, I'd hate it if I voted out of ignorance and offended you.
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7673 posts, RR: 18 Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1418 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8): Democracy is crippled when those that vote are misinformed. But, we are going to protect and defend their right to be stupid? Where are we headed when these people ARE the majority??
Incorrect. Democracy is crippled when artificial limits are placed on who can and cannot participate in the process. Whether you realize it or not, what you propose borders heavily on a fascist, autocratic regime. Where the state acts as is if knows better than the people it governs.
Remember in a democracy the government serves at the will of the people, not the other way around.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia
Vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 8200 posts, RR: 28 Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1413 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8): I could say the same for your opinion.
Which means that there is no objective way to determine whether someone is ignorant or uninformed.
Personally, I think your view is completely wrong. But you seem to think that it's not wrong. So who decides???
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8): But, we are going to protect and defend their right to be stupid?
You're goddamn right we are. We're going to protect MY right to be stupid, and YOUR right to be stupid as well. Because we do not live in a perfect world where people don't fuck up.
If you don't like the way the country is headed, there are two things you can do:
1.) Leave
2.) VOTE
I prefer #2, personally.
EDIT:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8): How democratic, majority viewpoint says what is right then?
Uhhh, dude....YES. We elect our government, don't we???
[Edited 2006-11-10 20:27:00]
"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
MaverickM11 From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 15722 posts, RR: 47 Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1404 times:
It's a nice idea but it's totally impractical. What I don't understand is the groups like "Vote or Die" which just ask people to vote no matter what....regardless whether they know what they're voting for or against. I don't understand what benefit there is, if any, to people voting for the sake of voting, rather than voting for the sake of making your voice heard. There's a huge difference, and it doesn't surprise me that people like Paris Hilton and P Diddy can't grasp it.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 13, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1402 times:
Quoting DesertJets (Reply 10): what you propose borders heavily on a fascist, autocratic regime
What you and others think (or insist) am I proposing, not what I am proposing. What is the point of standardized tests in schools? If this example is different to you, fine, not different to me. Why not standardize voting?
Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 9): Sorry King Lephron, I was not aware that you were so superior that it was up to you to decide that in your opinion the majority of people ignorant. Could you create a list of all the people that are allowed to vote, I'd hate it if I voted out of ignorance and offended you
I'm far from offended...you however are quite. I hope you do not expect me to be responsible for your opinions? Brilliant use of name-calling.
Quoting DesertJets (Reply 10): Remember in a democracy the government serves at the will of the people, not the other way around.
I don't think in black&white, I've never considered the latter of your statement.
[Edited 2006-11-10 20:29:21]
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
NeilYYZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1384 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 13): I hope you do not expect me to be responsible for your opinions? Brilliant use of name-calling.
I'm glad you're not offended, however, calling you King Lephron I thought would be a compliment, you want to filter out who can and can't vote. King implies that you have knowledge clearly well beyond my meager thought process.
Vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 8200 posts, RR: 28 Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1376 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8): I don't anymore, I don't take sides and there are no parties that sound like they have my interests in mind.
So.....you refuse to utilize your legal right to vote (even refusing to vote for the lesser of two evils, whichever it may be), and yet you propose placing limitations on those who wish to vote???
I'm actually quite amazed.
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8): That is how you and anyone that agrees with you will see it. Are other ways of seeing it possible?
Sure. I'm not a single-minded asshole, even if I come across that way. I also said "could" which seems to have escaped your notice.
My point was that there are an infinite amount of other ways one could look at it. Which, in turn, means that everyone could be ignorant, in someone else's view. So where does that leave us?
"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
Lehpron From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, RR: 22 Reply 17, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1371 times:
Just so everyone knows, I only came up what is being called my viewpoint a minute prior to posting the thread. This is not something that has been on my mind. If you come to the conclusion I have not thought this through, its yours. Read signature.
Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 11): If you don't like the way the country is headed, there are two things you can do:
1.) Leave
2.) VOTE
I prefer #2, personally
How is it you claim opinion on your choice, but do not acknowledge that the criteria was an opinion as well? That in your opinion, "there are two things you can do"? IMO, if you truly believ in freedom of speech, you should be responsible for every opinion you make and NOT talk like things are obvious.
Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 11): Quoting Lehpron (Reply 8):
How democratic, majority viewpoint says what is right then?
Uhhh, dude....YES. We elect our government, don't we???
Here's a few ideas:
1) What if that statement I made was an analogy?
2) What if I associate voting to something else and this whole thread has nothing to do with government or politics?
Quoting Vikkyvik (Reply 11): Personally, I think your view is completely wrong. But you seem to think that it's not wrong. So who decides???
Quoting MaverickM11 (Reply 12): It's a nice idea but it's totally impractical.
I agree it can be somewhat impractical due to finding a reference point. Though in my mind, such a reference would have to be calibrated through a series of questionares and only those who may actually vote should participate. Seems to me unfair for someone to vote and their say was not calibrated, of course that would be their fault for not filling out the questionaire. Which makes this true:
Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 14): however, calling you King Lephron I thought would be a compliment, you want to filter out who can and can't vote. King implies that you have knowledge clearly well beyond my meager thought process.
You're funny. I'm supposed to take a compliment by what you think the word means. BTW, you used the word 'meager'.
I agree, but for different reasons. You are slowly finding the holes in my 'argument'.
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 16): You are the one suggesting forcing an issue on others here
Dude, if you gather from my original thread that I suggest forcing, then those are your opinions as long as you see fit. How on Earth am I really suggesting force? Their your interpretations, not mine! I'm not about to combine what we are both saying and insist that standardization equates to force.
Dash8King From Canada, joined Nov 2001, 2742 posts, RR: 12 Reply 18, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1358 times:
I agree but why be so liberal about it? People that are successful have obviously made the best choices in life so only they should vote. So the new rules should include that you make at least 100k a year, drive an american car, be 25+ and pass your brilliant ignorance test. Thats the only way we can eliminate ignorance. One thing that should be considered as well is, should women vote? I think they are to emotional and I dont want that coming out in the elections.
RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1351 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 17):
I'm not the one who used the word "force".
Your entire first post was about forcing a test on voters to determine their 'fitness' to vote - so no, you use the word 'force' but in no way did your post imply it was voluntary.
Voters dont have to be fit to vote, they have to be a citizen - thats fitnes enough.
Voters are allowed to vote on whatever basis they want, including flipping a coin.
Gunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3460 posts, RR: 11 Reply 20, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1344 times:
Quoting Lehpron (Thread starter):
I think every ballot should have some kind of assessment test to evaluate each voter's knowledge of what or who they are voting for and weight their vote accordingly.
1) What if that statement I made was an analogy?
2) What if I associate voting to something else and this whole thread has nothing to do with government or politics?
1.) I am not responsible for your implied intent or implied messages. I can only call them as I see them, through my interpretations and perceptions
2.) See 1.
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 17): I agree, but for different reasons. You are slowly finding the holes in my 'argument'.
I'm pretty sure most of us saw the glaring hole right away...
Quoting Lehpron (Reply 17): How is it you claim opinion on your choice, but do not acknowledge that the criteria was an opinion as well? That in your opinion, "there are two things you can do"? IMO, if you truly believ in freedom of speech, you should be responsible for every opinion you make and NOT talk like things are obvious.
I honestly don't understand this paragraph; I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
Although, talking like things are obvious has little to do with anything. Besides, we're typing all this anyway....
"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
L410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5392 posts, RR: 19 Reply 23, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 1306 times:
Quoting Dash8King (Reply 18): People that are successful have obviously made the best choices in life so only they should vote. So the new rules should include that you make at least 100k a year, drive an american car, be 25+ and pass your brilliant ignorance test.
"Drive an american car" and "best choice in life" both in the same sentence...?
Apologies, quite obviously theres a 'dont' missing from my post - somehow it disappeared during the re-composition of my post while I worked out what to say!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 7028 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Read signature.
From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2091 posts, 
From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5392 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
