SR - apathy and voting and percentages, oh my

[Dory Grace]

to my:
>>There may very well be a percentage who
> > don't care one way or the other, but that certainly doesn't of necessity
> > spell apathy for the majority.

donal responds:
> Yes it does. Every time we have an election in this country political
> analysts from both parties bemoan the apathy of the voters. Apathy
> implies not feeling strongly enough about something to do something
> about it.

Well, that's absolutely true. However, voter turnout comes closer to
reflecting apathy towards the process of *voting* rather than towards the
issues at hand. I think that's pretty much the case here with the name
selection process as well.

> I'm sorry, 90-odd (in some cases, very odd) people

Um, gee. Thanks. I'm sure the people of the region conscientious enough to
actually make the effort to vote appreciate your opinion of them.

>out of the
> estimated 500 or so playing in this region is not 30%.

My mistake. I was going off a reference as to the percentage of voters from
Bryn Gwlad. However, 20% isn't shabby either. Compare the last voter
turnouts for Texas, Travis County, and Austin elections.

>I'm not
> restricting this to paid members, of course - that was a big point of
> discussion, not to restrict this vote to those who would actually have a
> vote if, say, we went principality.

I think that makes the numbers even more impressive.

>A little over 30% of the people who
> did vote - who were maybe 20% of the people who could have voted -
> that's what, about 7%?

Well, the same is true of some presidential elections, and yet we don't
throw out the presidency based on that line of reasoning. Yes, there are
always people who would like to, but that's not the way an electoral system
works. If you have strong feelings about the way you'd like to see things
go, you campaign. Of course, the campaigning is supposed to happen *before*
the election, Donal, not after.

Donal says:
>I don't call that exactly "a mandate from the
> masses".

I don't remember anyone calling anything a "mandate from the masses."  Of
course, the American Heritage Dictionary disagrees with you, defining
'mandate' as "2.) The wishes of a political electorarate, expressed by
election results to its representatives in government."   I think most of us
would like it if everyone else would not only agree with us, but actually
put some effort into stepping forward and saying so. Are the ballot results
we've gotten the majority of the majority? No, they're not, but you've
gotten responses from a sizeable number of folks who *both* a) got handed a
ballot, and b) actually voted and handed it back. Twice.

In reference to Lyonel's and my voting/not voting, Donal says:
> But he's been to lots of fighter practices. And even you have been to a
> couple. Ballots were handed out there.

I can't speak for Lyonel, but I can speak for myself. I've never seen a
ballot. No one's ever handed one to me. The times I've been able to stop by
fighter practice have been well after the announcements. Outside of that,
what's your point? I was just offering an example of why someone may not
have voted.

to my:
> > But rather than have anyone think I'm for "rushing" the process
> > (lord knows some dinosaurs get charlie-horses if they move faster than a
> > crawl)

Donal replies:
> Gods forbid that anyone who's been around a while - whether in this
> kingdom or whatever - might be cautious about rushing into something
> that promises such sweeping change. By all means, let's jump in with
> both feet!

Um, I'm not sure where you're going with this. *I'm* not the one rushing to
send the results off to Crown. Like I said before, hell, do it again. What's
the rush? As I said in my previous post:

>> I'm all for doing it one more time. Send out the ballots, make sure
>> there's a space for folk to vote "none of the above" or "no, I don't want
>> the region to have a name or identity at all,"


then Donal says:
> Wrong again. I've never been against the region having an identity.

Where did I say, "Donal says let's not have an identity"???

Donal goes on to say:
>I'd
> love the region to have an identity. But guess what? A group does not
> fulfill a list of requirements and get the Group Identity Merit Badge.
> "Gee, Counselor, we've got a name, and we've done an event, and we have
> some titled positions like Warlord and Bard! Do we pass?" "Sure, Region
> Billy, here you go!" Let's have a few more instances of doing things as
> a region before congratulating ourselves on our identity.

Not a thing here I disagree with (except what seems to be an implication
that we don't have a regional identity). What does any of this have to do
with the discussion at hand?

I said:
> > (snip)  Make the ballots available
> > online as well as in hard copy to make sure as many people as possible
have
> > the easiest access possible to the voting process.

and Donal replied:
> That's funny, one of the chief complaints of the folks on this list who
> missed out on the voting was that publishing online is not a good way to
> reach the general populace.

I believe some folk expressed a concern that the Internet not be the *only*
means or *principal* means of disseminating information, and I've always
concurred with that concern. However, I also think that it's grossly
inefficient to *not* use one of the most efficient means of information
dissemination we have available to us as well as using printed word and word
of mouth.


Aquilanne


Dory Grace
The Inkwell ~ Austin, TX
http://www.inkwellarts.com
dgrace at inkwellarts.com

"No matter where you go, there you are."


============================================================================
Go to http://lists.ansteorra.org/lists.html to perform mailing list tasks.