Groklaw - Digging for Truth

	When you want to know more...

Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines

ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

You won't find me on Facebook

Donate

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments

Sponsors

Hosting:

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster

The Conduct of Judge Alsup | 101 comments | Create New Account

Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.

The Conduct of Judge Alsup

Authored by: Tyro on Monday, November 05 2012 @ 12:45 PM EST

FWIW, among voting systems I support either Condorcet or Instant Runoff.
Neither is perfect, but either is better than plurality rules. (Majority rules
might be ok, but that would often lead to nobody getting elected. Not always a
bad idea given the candidates.)

In fact, given the candidates, the corruption, etc. I actually favor a lottery
system, sort of like the draft. Other changes would be needed, of course. It
would become even more important to decentralize authority, because you would
come up with a real loser more often than under the current system. But my
feeling is that ALL of the major candidates are less qualified for office than
is the average citizen. Less qualified because less open to reason, more fixed
on exogenous grounds, so they don't react the the event, but based on some group
of decisions that they made earlier...which are often "Will I accept
campaign contributions from xxx?". Etc. A lottery would get rid of
campaign contributions, which is a big win in and of itself.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )