Comment Re:Everybody's Looking at That Phone-Thing (Score 1) 311
Brilliant!
Mr Richard C. Cheng got a significant mention in the judgment about not only failing to give a full and frank summary of the situation in the extradition submission, but making deceitful and untrue claims.
Perhaps this Mr Richard C. Cheng http://www.caldir.com/lawyers/California/San-Jose/95113/pmjl/Richard-C-Cheng.html
Neither the surface nor the subsurface of the moon, nor any part thereof or natural resources in place, shall become property of any State, international intergovernmental or non-governmental organization, national organization or non-governmental entity or of any natural person.
The International Building Code (what most of us use)
Is this the same sort of thing as your World Series baseball which is only valid for very small values of world? Worked in a sawmill here outside of the US and I'm pretty sure that you can get timber in metric sizes and the only tape measurements I saw were all metric.
Your quote of the Greens is spot on, but you will admit that it has nothing to do with the IRV system but rather, as I said earlier, a lack of education. Also the number of seats won by a minor party will always be low due to the size of the electorates. Major parties are obviously more likely to take seats. It isn't meant to be a proportional system, we have that for the upper house.
Also, your comments are about third party and minor party representation is still misleading. Take for example the Tasmanian Legislative Council. According to you, since they are elected via IRV, they should be mostly ALP or coalition. Yet when your look at the results you will see that 11 of the 15 seats are independents!
As for whether voters actually do vote insincerely, I put more stock into the research we have done over the past for years at The Center for Election Science than in a wikipedia entry which most assuredly has been heavily tuned by FairVote, a highly dishonest pro-IRV organization.
You might have your little beef with FairVote whoever they are, but nothing stopping you putting your position up with citations on wikipedia. The article I mentioned cites three references. "Collective Decisions and Voting" by Nicolaus Tideman, "Single transferable vote resists strategic voting" and "An investigation into the relative manipulability of four voting systems". Your argument is remains uncited and the amount of intellectual dishonesty coming from you does your argument no favours.
Besides the Greens, Labour, the coalition of Liberal, Nationals, the Liberal Nationals, the Country Liberals, there are 4 independents. Definitely a two party system here. Of course there are two strong opposing groups because of the dichotomous nature of politics. Besides the point that major parties are major for a reason (generally popular).
And there are only 150 seats in the house of reps not 564. How can you trust or support a website that is completely wrong like that?
Out of 564 seats in the IRV-elected House of Representatives, ONE was won by a third party in the last AU election
Official Election results. or By party
Besides the Greens, Labour, the coalition of Liberal, Nationals, the Liberal Nationals, the Country Liberals, there are 4 independents. Definitely a two party system here. Of course there are two strong opposing groups because of the dichotomous nature of politics.
Interesting that only this website of yours says NatLib and there are only 150 seats in the house of reps not 564. How can you trust or support a website that is completely wrong like that?
There's nothing to agree or disagree with here. This is just objective statistical fact.
quite, and you are in the wrong. Ps, did you read the wikipedia cited articles about IRV and it not leading to strategic voting in practice?
I read it, but disagree. They are ignoring the actual political situation here in Australia and don't include the recent election results which have shown an increase in third party and independent voting.
Also, the strategic voting argument of putting a less preferred candidate first also ignores the benefits to the party of having more primary votes. In Australia, the primary vote count is the basis for government funding of the campaign.
UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker
