Voting VS Spending

[Xerographica]

Possibly because the Constitution arranges for voting (by court decisions), and not buying votes (by court decisions).  The decisions previously have been "one person, one vote".  The idea of money as a voting power is rather new and should be eliminated.

What's the difference between using money to rank producers and using money to rank politicians?  Spending either is, or isn't, better than voting at ranking people.   

[Cavebear]

What's the difference between using money to rank producers and using money to rank politicians?  Spending either is, or isn't, better than voting at ranking people.

You are conflating "one person, one vote" with auctions.  In the former, there is no bargaining.  In the latter, only the one who spends the most money wins.

Let's try this another way.  You want to post.  But it goes to a secret site where you have to bid to post it.  And I have a lot more money than you do.  So you never get to post.  I keep stopping you (and you don't get the money from the bid because it just sort of disappears and even worse, you can't prove I actually spent any money)?

How would you feel about THAT?

[trdsf]

So the only reason you oppose replacing voting with donating is because the amount of money can be variable?  You oppose donating in general?  Have you ever previously argued against donating?

I have been perfectly clear that donating over voting is not a reliable way to measure public will, not that donating is a bad thing (and I quote myself: "If what you're after is a fundraiser, just run a fucking fundraiser….").

Either to point to any place where I said donations are bad, or admit you're a liar.

And another straw man.  And you ignored every single point I raised.

Obviously, your position is indefensible.

[Cavebear]

I have been perfectly clear that donating over voting is not a reliable way to measure public will, not that donating is a bad thing (and I quote myself: "If what you're after is a fundraiser, just run a fucking fundraiser….").

Either to point to any place where I said donations are bad, or admit you're a liar.

And another straw man.  And you ignored every single point I raised.

Obviously, your position is indefensible.

Well said.  Xerographica ignores all replies to his/her posts.  The steadfastness of the arguments allows no variation or change.

[Baruch]

Well said.  Xerographica ignores all replies to his/her posts.  The steadfastness of the arguments allows no variation or change.

Proof that AI exists, but is of an inferior kind ;-)

[Cavebear]

Proof that AI exists, but is of an inferior kind ;-)

Your claim that Xerographica is a bot is intriguing.  Any evidience?

[Baruch]

Your claim that Xerographica is a bot is intriguing.  Any evidience?

You provide it.  Do you read your own posts?  Invariable postings ... lack of variation.

[Cavebear]

You provide it.  Do you read your own posts?  Invariable postings ... lack of variation.

Which of course avoids my point, as you like to do to everyone's posts.

[Xerographica]

I have been perfectly clear that donating over voting is not a reliable way to measure public will, not that donating is a bad thing (and I quote myself: "If what you're after is a fundraiser, just run a fucking fundraiser….").

Either to point to any place where I said donations are bad, or admit you're a liar.

And another straw man.  And you ignored every single point I raised.

Obviously, your position is indefensible.

Donating and voting are two different ways to rank things.  My argument is that donating is always better than voting at ranking things.  Are you arguing that donating is sometimes better than voting at ranking things? 

[Xerographica]

You are conflating "one person, one vote" with auctions.  In the former, there is no bargaining.  In the latter, only the one who spends the most money wins.

Let's try this another way.  You want to post.  But it goes to a secret site where you have to bid to post it.  And I have a lot more money than you do.  So you never get to post.  I keep stopping you (and you don't get the money from the bid because it just sort of disappears and even worse, you can't prove I actually spent any money)?

How would you feel about THAT?

Your analogy doesn't work.  If we applied what I'm proposing to posts, then everybody would be free to post, but we'd use donating to rank the posts. 

Does it matter how beneficial your behavior is to others?  If so, then how are you supposed to gain this knowledge?  Mind-reading? 

[Cavebear]

Your analogy doesn't work.  If we applied what I'm proposing to posts, then everybody would be free to post, but we'd use donating to rank the posts. 

Does it matter how beneficial your behavior is to others?  If so, then how are you supposed to gain this knowledge?  Mind-reading?

Um, yes, exactly.  You want "pay to play".  We understand each other by discussion,

Are you a bot?  Can you lie about whether you are?

[Xerographica]

Um, yes, exactly.  You want "pay to play".  We understand each other by discussion,

Are you a bot?  Can you lie about whether you are?

I'm not a bot.  I'm guessing that you aren't either.  You didn't answer my questions...

Does it matter how beneficial your behavior is to others?  If so, then how are you supposed to gain this knowledge?  Mind-reading?

[Cavebear]

I'm not a bot.  I'm guessing that you aren't either.  You didn't answer my questions...

Does it matter how beneficial your behavior is to others?  If so, then how are you supposed to gain this knowledge?  Mind-reading?

Looking back, I see I DIDN'T answer your questions. 

"Does it matter how beneficial your behavior is to others?"  No, but I think it is.

"how are you supposed to gain this knowledge?  Mind-reading? "  Studying, reading, reading and studying.  I read EVERYTHING.  There is damn little I am not competent about. 

In regard to that, I once sat next to someone in an office waiting room.  He mentioned an explosives discussion.  We talked about it for a while.  Finally, a meeting manager announced the explosives meeting was to start.  My discussion friend said, well, let's go.  When I told him I wasn't an explosives expert he was completely surprised.

And I once discussed human migration to North America for an hour at a dinner with the guy next to me.  He finally asked where I got my Anthro degree.  When I told him I only had a poly-sci BS, he was shocked.  Turned out he was the Anthro chair at Washington State Univ.  He spent 3 days with my sister and BIL trying to get them to admit I was just kidding him.  Nope.

Want anything else?

[Baruch]

Which of course avoids my point, as you like to do to everyone's posts.

As is your lack of self awareness.

[trdsf]

Donating and voting are two different ways to rank things.  My argument is that donating is always better than voting at ranking things.  Are you arguing that donating is sometimes better than voting at ranking things?

Fine, you admit you're a liar, then.

You were asked for very specific things and instead you make up bullshit that I never said so you can ignore direct challenges and pretend you have a viable position.

We're done.  I'd ask you to let me know when you resolve your rectocranial inversion so we could have a serious, adult conversation, but in the first place, I don't believe you're capable of either, and in the second, I really don't care.