Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Agdune]

It probably won't ever get quite that bad, let's be honest. However, being government made we can guarantee that it'll be so badly designed it'll probably end up blocking 1/3rd of all websites and accidently leak our bank details directly to Russian hackers, at which point Australian society, consisting mostly of drunken bogans with no knowledge of anything other than the retarded daily soap opera 'Home and Away', decide to simply burn the internet rather than revert to any system that doesn't carry the label "protecting children".

[Jreengus]

First line was a joke. The second one wasn't.

If the government was able to suddenly remove our votes, I'm pretty sure it would do so at the first opportunity. Assuming that what you just said wasn't also a joke.

You seem to misunderstand. It's not that you can't vote it's that you legally have to vote. Thus it is no longer a right. The right to X implies to right to not X. Thus the right to free speech comes with the right to not say things you don't want to. In a similar vein the right to vote must also include the right not to vote, by making voting compulsory it is no longer a right.

[Earthquake Damage]

I'm curious now if Australia allows write-ins on the ballot.  If not, it's a sign that Australian political parties have enshrined their own power in law, especially if there's a minimum vote threshold needed to get a seat (e.g. if there are 100 seats in parliament but you need a minimum of 5% of the vote to get any seats -- thus minor parties with 1-4% of the vote aren't represented -- I'm pretty sure they do this in Russia, among other places).  "You have to vote and your vote has to go to one of us.  BWAHAHAHA!"

[Osmosis Jones]

Jreengus, you do have the right not to vote. You can submit a blank ballot if you so desire, or a donkey vote, whatever. The only requirement by Aussie law is that, if a registered voter, you present yourself at a polling place on election day.

Also, did some of you guys read the rebuttal linked in the second post? I'm not disagreeing with the fact that censorship in my country is getting ridiculous, only that if you're going to get worked up, make sure it's for a good reason. We have a lot of these; ridiculous game classifications, stupid restrictions on advertising material (in S.A., thanks to everyones' favourite attorney general), crippling internet censorship, blatant abuse of political power in shutting down satire sites, etc., so we don't need to get stirred up by fake ones as well.

[JoshuaFH]

What the heck is a donkey vote?

[Jreengus]

That's not the same. Sure in China I can in an enclosed room with no-one else in it say "The government sucks!" Point is legally I'm not meant to. The point of enforced voting is that everyone should turn up and vote for a candidate, if you were supposed to be able to circumvent that then there wouldn't be any point in the enforced voting. A flaw in a law does not mean that law doesn't exist.

Ninja'd

A donkey vote means voting for the candidates in the order they appear on the ballot form.

[JoshuaFH]

So... does that mean you just vote for the person on top?

[Jreengus]

Australia utilises a system where you can vote for multiple candidates in order of preference. They actually randomized the order people appear on the ballot to prevent parties picking people with names high in the alphabet in order to score better from donkey votes.

[Osmosis Jones]

So... does that mean you just vote for the person on top?

Or the bottom, but yeah.

That's not the same. Sure in China I can in an enclosed room with no-one else in it say "The government sucks!" Point is legally I'm not meant to. The point of enforced voting is that everyone should turn up and vote for a candidate, if you were supposed to be able to circumvent that then there wouldn't be any point in the enforced voting. A flaw in a law does not mean that law doesn't exist.

Heh, turns out I was wrong. There is a law requiring you to vote; if you turn up, get ticked off, and then are seen to not place a ballot in the box, you can still technically be marked as not voting. Nevertheless though, I have to ask what is the big deal? It can't be the actual effort involved, voting is hardly a major hassle; 15 minutes one weekend, every 3 years.

So you have a philosophical objection to it. We have the de facto freedom to not vote. Australia's secret ballot system means you can for all intents and purposes not vote. Given that the secret ballot is a cornerstone of our electoral process, the loophole is too. Would it really be any different de jure?

Honestly, I like that we have (technically) compulsory voting. It still allows us the ability not to vote if we truly, deeply will so, but otherwise it makes people get off their arses and do something. Apathy is a major problem with the general populace, and this is a way of combating it.

[Jreengus]

You actually want apathetic people voting? Seriously that's worse than donkey votes!

People shouldn't even be allowed to vote unless they pass some kind of test to prove that they are well informed on every available candidate.

[Tack]

Ah, so now you want to take votes away from unintelligent people?

Look. We all have the responsibility to vote. I guess that also means that if someone gets voted in who we didn't want, we have complaining rights, because we ACTUALLY voted against him. Think of all the people in america who would exercise their right not to vote and sit on their arses at home and play HALO for an extra 15 min (Halo Rules), and then bitch when a person they dislike gets in.



On this note. The government is beginning to overstep their boundaries. The only question now is, are we going to sit and let Nineteen Eighty-Four develop?

[Jreengus]

We all have the responsibility to vote.

No you all have a responsibility to vote responsibly. If you aren't educated on all the possible options enough to pass a simple test on them then you shouldn't be able to vote. When people vote based simply on who they like or what they want rather than on an educated opinion based on the needs of the country and who will serve best then the entire process is little more than a farce.

[Tack]

Result: Kevin Rudd

[Emperor_Jonathan]

The only question now is, are we going to sit and let Nineteen Eighty-Four develop?

No. But we're not doing anymore furry/cosplay protests on Atkinsons home.

Result: Kevin Rudd

And yet he was better than Howard ;_;.

[Googolplexed]

Result: Kevin Rudd

And yet he was better than Howard ;_;.

Nah, Howard was better. Rudd just went and gave the entire treasury to the public as an economic stimulous
Seriously, how does giving everyone 1-3k help the economy once they've spent it. And most people just put it in the bank.

Not to mention the filtering system he supports, and the laptops for schools programs, 70% of teachers don't know their way around computers, at least not well enough to use them for classwork, coupled with the security so weak it can be bypassed by clicking run as administrator it leads to the laptops not being used for educational purposes most of the time.
(I have seen alot of grand-theft-auto at my school)

Rudd just exists to spend money, at least howard had some restraint