I'll be voting yes. Thing is you do need to your top 3 (or more) in the boxes at all, just put in 1, if the others candidates or party do not represents your political view. By the way, what i find confusing is the name AV (alternative vote). It kind of misrepresents the voting system it stand for, kind of like false advertisement.
Having heard quite a bit about this over the last few days I'm gonna stick with not bothering, sounds just as flawed but in a different way. In the end it's like we're all choosing which way to select which turd we have to eat anyway. We can change the selection method and maybe tweak the choices but in the end we're still stuck with turd.
Maybe - but it will be the turd that people think stinks the least - and if you think it'll not make much if any difference, why not try it and see to be sure?
I worked through various scenarios last night and came to the conclusion that AV is marginally better in a small percentage of scenarios. So it's a yes from me. Simon?</xfactor>
I voted for change, because we won't know till we try it and it's not going to make much difference lol.
I had the same thoughts. Most of the articles I've read where they check what difference AV would have made in various past elections seem to come to the same conclusion: a couple of results here and there change, but overall, not much difference. So we might as well give it a go
I have to say that the way this has been argued (on both sides) has been full of disinformation and far too much slating the other method as opposed to bigging up their own. Much the same as general election campaigns. Frankly I'm tired of it. The stuff I got through the post from the conservatives about was jaw dropping.
Gadget manufacturers don't base their entire campaign on how useless the opposition are (not often anyway). They go out of their way to show off how amazing they are. And it works. Politicians take note.
Comment