"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- some old guy nobody remembers these days.
How many of those Apple portables are running WIndows via bootcamp?
I haven't posted a journal here in almost three years, because I couldn't find the button to start a new entry.
So... hi, Slashdot. I used to be really active here, but now I mostly lurk and read. I've missed you.
So how would one indicate a lack of confidence in the system, as opposed to the specific candidates? Abstaining is not simply a way of expressing apathy; it can also indicate that one finds the office itself illegitimate.
...That is an excellent point.
Also, from a pragmatic point-of-view, spoiled ballots tend to be reported and counted exactly the same as uncast ballots, so showing up just to cast a spoiled ballot is a complete waste of time (yours and the officials') regardless of the reason.
Well, Toronto just finished its mayoral election, which was decided by a margin of almost 100K people (out of the roughly 500K votes that seemed to be counted for the mayor's office). My showing up (to vote not for the guy I thought would do the best job, but in typically Canadian fashion, against the guy I thought would do the worst) feels like it was a waste of my time, other than councillor, where i did vote for the winner. School board trustee, they gave me the wrong ballot, so I had to abstain there.
Basically, I don’t think showing up and spoiling your ballot is a waste of time; it’s speaking up and registering your discontent. I know they’re counted the same as uncast ballots, but maybe they shouldn’t be.
Of course, I also think that an election should be won by a majority of eligible voters, rather than a simple plurality of voters who turned up... But that's just me. And I'm aware that those are kind of contradictory statements... it's hard to explain. More just of a case of what I think abstentions and ballot-spoils mean in terms of intent.
I can think of worse people than undertakers to describe as “scummy bottom-feeders”&hellip personal-injury lawyers who encourage people to sue their own elderly parents, just for one example. Undertakers provide a fairly valuable service—they work with death on a daily basis, so they can help the bereaved through what has to get done. Anyone who encourages someone to sue family for their own carelessness they need to be introduced to the business end of a hot poker.
Can, sure, but it sounds like that isn’t the default action. While the default’s safer, and I’m all for safety in my systems, too many end users have become too dependent on email for it to suddenly go away because of a package failure like that. It’s especially disturbing, reading TFA, to find that a lot of high-profile spam services abruptly shut down as a result. Those guys should have been ready for it.
That’s a very good thing to point outstill, though, it’s certainly not fair that having ClamAV get administratively killed from afar means that your email service coughs and dies.
It could be a long-dormant genetic thing. My mother’s brother and his entire family look like they have a great tan, at all times. Because that side of the family is Irish through and through, we’re guessing that there’s some Black Irish in our family—long-since descendants of Spanish and Portuguese settlers in Ireland—and my uncle, for whatever reason, wound up with a phenotype that expresses it.
Of course, how that would come through Hong Kong and a Latvian Jew, I can’t explain, but I’m also not a geneticist maybe your mother has some ancient Australian Aboriginal ancestors?
It's anonymous at the time that it happens. You can walk up to a total stranger, in a foreign city, and punch them in the mouth, and it's completely anonymous, despite the fact that ultimately, your identity hasn't been hidden.