3 ms·

You clearly do understand what the words on the ballot mean. I doubt most people seeing this for the first time at the poll will get it. I doubt most will eve

You clearly do understand what the words on the ballot mean. I doubt most people seeing this for the first time at the poll will get it. I doubt most will even connect its meaning to employee non-competes. Note the word 'employee' is nowhere to be found. This is sandbagging at the polls. Voters will just scratch their heads and think "sure, I'd love for Georgia to be more economically competitive" and check yes. As an added bonus, its more difficult to repeal a constitutional amendment in Georgia than to add one.

tptacek 16y ago
I would argue --- and I think I'll win this argument --- that these words written against the amendment are far more misleading. There is nothing "scary" about this proposal; it is in fact the way most other states handle noncompetes, and it makes sense. If you want to oppose noncompetes, fine. I'm on the fence. But be honest about it.
- jhancock 16y ago
  I can easily separate the OP's opinion and leaning from the background he adds to what I will see at the poll on Tuesday. The OP does shed light on what the vote is about, whereas what voters will see at the poll is, I believe, worded so that most voters will not understand what they are voting on. You may feel there is nothing scary about the proposal. What I find scary is the method and wording that is placed in front of the unsuspecting voter. This is sandbagging, plain and simple. You don't get to do a bit of googling once the curtain is pulled to find out what you're voting on. The OP says he has received robo-calls on the subject. I read the local news almost daily and have assisted in two Georgia campaigns this year and this is the first I've heard of this proposed amendment.
- lanceweatherby 16y ago
  The only place where the word scary is involved is the title on HN. It's not in the post that it links to.

tptacek 16y ago

I would argue --- and I think I'll win this argument --- that these words written against the amendment are far more misleading. There is nothing "scary" about this proposal; it is in fact the way most other states handle noncompetes, and it makes sense. If you want to oppose noncompetes, fine. I'm on the fence. But be honest about it.

jhancock 16y ago
I can easily separate the OP's opinion and leaning from the background he adds to what I will see at the poll on Tuesday. The OP does shed light on what the vote is about, whereas what voters will see at the poll is, I believe, worded so that most voters will not understand what they are voting on. You may feel there is nothing scary about the proposal. What I find scary is the method and wording that is placed in front of the unsuspecting voter. This is sandbagging, plain and simple. You don't get to do a bit of googling once the curtain is pulled to find out what you're voting on. The OP says he has received robo-calls on the subject. I read the local news almost daily and have assisted in two Georgia campaigns this year and this is the first I've heard of this proposed amendment.
lanceweatherby 16y ago
The only place where the word scary is involved is the title on HN. It's not in the post that it links to.