That's exactly it. I often use the term "Omni-obstructionist" to describe these cretins.

Obviously, I'm not referring to intelligent people who have valid, supportable objections to things that are genuinely harmful. But based on the ignorant scare-mongering that permeates their press release that has been spammed in this topic any number of times, that does not describe these "Environment Texas" wackos.

Sure, have a "yes/no": check box, but after it, a text box where the voter gives their reasoning behind their vote. No reasoning, then the vote can be appropriately weighted. A whole bunch of votes with identical boilerplate "reasoning" pasted in, also weighted appropriately.

This proposal seems sort of OK ... he's not constrained to vote whatever way the internet polling goes. I'm very much against internet voting for real votes, though -- unless some scheme can be devised to guarantee the secret ballot. It is absolutely essential that a person is not only able to cast a vote where no one can tell how he voted -- it *must* be impossible for anyone to prove to a third party how he voted to prevent vote buying/extortion schemes. Absentee ballots are a violation of this, but probably necessary. I'd sure like to see their use restricted to people who are actually absent, or have mobility issues with getting to a polling place.

Perhaps some way a person can change their vote later, up to the deadline? There should be a way with one-way hashes and encryption to make that possible, while not making it possible for anyone on the inside to determine how they voted, either time.

he lives in Singapore and has for three years

Now that's a bit of information that hasn't been in any of the stories I've read about this guy up until now. He left the U.S. three years ago, it's not a recent "just to avoid IPO taxes" thing.

Looking at the reviews to get an idea of what it's about.... The impression I get from even the five-star reviews is of a story about a relentlessly grim-dark dystopian horror, life sucks, then you die in horrible agony, and things only get worse for the survivors. Sounds like it's very well written, but not something I'm interested in reading. Or watching.

(Cue absolutely predictable and completely off-base "You're a moron who only wants Disney endings" diatribes, to which I say "PHBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBTTTT!!!!")

In an unrelated matter, please nobody post "This statement is False" or the Internet may implode.

Too late, you just did{|{|}|{|{|{|}|NO CARRIER

Any source of power will have the usual suspects reeling in terror of it ... or pretend terror. We're going to have to understand that some people are really opposed to clean, cheap, abundant energy. "Nothing short of a disaster" is how one of the leading soft energy types described it.

People need to understand where the omni-obstructionists are coming from, and weigh their arguments appropriately.

Fusion, even if it's the Mr. Fusion of the Back to the Future movies (I WANT ONE!!!) will definitely not be immune from the kind of over-the-top scaremongering we've seen all too much of.

This ...

If I had to explain antitrust in a single word, it would not be 'competition' -- it would be 'power.' The power to raise prices above a competitive level; the power to punish people who break your rules. Such power is something society usually vests in government. Antitrust law is in part concerned with private industry attempting to assert government-like power.

... deserves "+5 Insightful".

no text

But note that Arthur C. Clarke spoke favorably of "Perelandra" in one of his essays.

Especially if you're throwing your baseball into my yard for the specific purpose of disrupting my garden party, because you have a moral objection to garden parties.