response 75 of 117:

Nov 5 01:25 UTC 1995

My point was just that not all traditions are to be revered.

response 77 of 117:

Nov 16 00:33 UTC 1995

John, what are the reasons for longer or shorter? Is there some physical
constraint on allowing say - 2 screens? I like the idea of candidates
having opportunity to more fully develop their thoughts and plans. 

response 79 of 117:

Nov 16 07:17 UTC 1995

Like, "fully develop" the reader to sleep?

response 81 of 117:

Nov 17 03:33 UTC 1995

        Placing the reader into catatonia would not be desireable.
However, forcing a limit may not be wise.. if the candidate wishes
to shoot themselves in the foot by making a fourty screen post of
it, then let them. If you enact a one screen limit, some who don't
have as much to say may go on to just try and fill space, to reach
the "limit".

response 83 of 117:

Nov 17 19:17 UTC 1995

I could also make it a "total characters" limit rather than "total
lines."

I'm having some second thoughts about the wisdom of putting a
"candidate's statement" feature in the vote program at all, so
I'd like to say what those second thoughts are and invite feed-
back.
  Every year I get a ballot in the mail from the university where
I did my undergraduate work--it's the election for the Board of
Overseers, the university's governing body, and as an alumnus,
I'm entitled to vote. Enclosed with the ballot is a brochure
with a statement by each candidate summarizing their vision
about board service and perhaps their positions on a few issues.
I don't keep myself informed on the state of the university, and
usually I don't bother to vote in the board election, but a few
times I've read through the candidates' statements and returned
the ballot. I've never felt very comfortable doing that though,
because the candidates' statements can't give me enough informa-
tion to cast a truly informed vote--it's not easy to distinguish
between important issues and peripheral ones, between wise
insight and BS. The only way I could become an informed voter
is to keep up with the affairs of the university, and I don't
do that.
  In the situation I just described, where the voters are scattered
all over the world, there's no practical way around the election
format that they use. But on Grex, where anyone who can run the
vote program is always just a few keystrokes away from the Coop
conference, the reasoning doesn't apply. Including candidates'
statements in the vote program could have the effect of encoura-
ging people to vote who haven't informed themselves on the issues,
for the same reason that I've cast uninformed votes a few times
in the university board election.
  Since anyone who can vote can join coop, inform themselves on
the issues, and interact with the board candidates, wouldn't it
be better for the vote program to encourage people to do that
rather than try to provide Readers Digest Condensed Versions of
the candidates' positions?
  I think what I'm saying here is similar to some points STeve
Andre made a number of responses back.
  Comments?

response 85 of 117:

Nov 17 22:59 UTC 1995

The argument in #83 says that members should not vote unless they
do "inform themsevles on the issues". Well, we do that all the time
in national, state and local elections, because it *is not possible* 
to have the time to stay informed on all issues. We also *seek* members
to support the system, with no requirement that they participate in coop.
Should we not also encourage them to exercise one of the few perogatives
of membership, which is to vote? I realize we would all love to have
intelligent and informed voters, but when it comes down to it, that is
not how democracies are designed to function.

response 87 of 117:

Nov 18 00:45 UTC 1995

        Well, if I could vote, it'd be cool if I could read what the
candidates had to say to me, before I go and cast it, even if I
have all sorts of other info. I mean, what would they want to say,
if this was their only chance to say something?

response 89 of 117:

Nov 18 06:50 UTC 1995

I also like being able to read the candidates platforms. I agree with 
John that it would be better if everyone knew the candidates, but
I don't agree that leaving the candidates' statements off will yield
more informed voting, because I think the folks affected by such a policy
were going to vote anyway.

response 91 of 117:

Nov 18 19:04 UTC 1995

Yes, a good idea,, hopefully, an impossible task.

response 93 of 117:

Nov 18 22:27 UTC 1995

        Anyway, how can you make a more informed vote if you keep info
out of the hands of people?

response 95 of 117:

Nov 19 00:00 UTC 1995

  hey how about getting all the candidates on a party channel for an
actual debate.  Highlights could be posted here.  It might be fun and
possibly more informative than simple platforms.

response 97 of 117:

Nov 20 06:45 UTC 1995

Is ajax going to do his candidate survey again this year?  That was helpful
last year.

response 99 of 117:

Nov 20 15:05 UTC 1995

Yup...it's about 10% done, planning on finishing it tonight and mailing it
in the next day or two.