5 ms·

This is why you need some redundancy built into the voting mechanism, otherwise you're always going to get such mistakes. In the British Parliament you have to

by hanoz 8y ago

This is why you need some redundancy built into the voting mechanism, otherwise you're always going to get such mistakes. In the British Parliament you have to physically walk into a separate Aye or No lobby to register your vote. Some might think this an anachronism, but you don't tend to mill around in a crowded room with a load of people you disagree with without realising.

sambeau 8y ago
It's nearly happened: A minister inadvertently found himself in the wrong lobby in a Commons vote after a mix-up with a glass of water. Lib Dem MP Andrew Stunell was filling up a glass from a washroom inside one of the Commons lobbies where MPs cast their votes, when the doors closed. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16746389 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16746389
- Reason077 8y ago
  Well, the Lib Dems have always struggled with which side of the House they're on, so in this particular case it's not that surprising!
gpmcadam 8y ago
You often have to enter your email address twice and click a confirmation link to sign up to even the most straightforward mailing lists. But to vote on legislation affecting literally hundreds of millions of people for generations, just hit a button and there's no going back.
- tialaramex 8y ago
  But there /is/ always going back. That's the thing. They can decide tomorrow, or next week, or next year that actually Article 13 is a bad idea and revoke it. There are reasons to support a different mechanism for voting, but the idea that this is irrevocable and so needs safeguards to prevent mistakes is not one.
  - benmmurphy 8y ago
    the EU parliament can't actually trigger a vote by themselves. I think it requires the EU commission to introduce the legislation. so if parliament believes it made a mistake and the commission won't support them then there is no going back. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/powers-and-procedures/legislative-powers http://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/powers-and... 'A Member of the European Parliament, working in one of the parliamentary committees, draws up a report on a proposal for a ‘legislative text’ presented by the European Commission, the only institution empowered to initiate legislation.' I guess in a way the EU commission has a similar Veto power that the US president has except it possible for the legislature in the US to override the President's Veto power.
tialaramex 8y ago
Historically there was only one lobby (after all it's not usual to deliberately build rooms with two lobbies) and so parliament would do divisions like this: When the question is asked, it would be decided which alternative most preserves the status quo. Supporters of the contrary opinion must leave their seats and go into the lobby, those content would remain. This way if everybody is too lazy to get up and vote, nothing happens. But of course this makes it key to find ways to make your side of the question be the one that stays seated, as you'll thereby pick up all the lazy or incompetent votes. So the rebuilt Palace has two lobbies, and remaining in your seat now is an abstention (you can also just vote twice, once each way, if you are concerned that some mischief will be attempted with the lists of voters, but though it's not forbidden this is a huge waste of people's time in tabulating the votes and so it's frowned upon). Thomas Jefferson describes the old system because that's what was in place when he wrote about it.

by hanoz 8y ago

sambeau 8y ago

It's nearly happened: A minister inadvertently found himself in the wrong lobby in a Commons vote after a mix-up with a glass of water. Lib Dem MP Andrew Stunell was filling up a glass from a washroom inside one of the Commons lobbies where MPs cast their votes, when the doors closed. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16746389 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16746389

Reason077 8y ago
Well, the Lib Dems have always struggled with which side of the House they're on, so in this particular case it's not that surprising!

gpmcadam 8y ago

You often have to enter your email address twice and click a confirmation link to sign up to even the most straightforward mailing lists. But to vote on legislation affecting literally hundreds of millions of people for generations, just hit a button and there's no going back.

tialaramex 8y ago
But there /is/ always going back. That's the thing. They can decide tomorrow, or next week, or next year that actually Article 13 is a bad idea and revoke it. There are reasons to support a different mechanism for voting, but the idea that this is irrevocable and so needs safeguards to prevent mistakes is not one.
- benmmurphy 8y ago
  the EU parliament can't actually trigger a vote by themselves. I think it requires the EU commission to introduce the legislation. so if parliament believes it made a mistake and the commission won't support them then there is no going back. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/powers-and-procedures/legislative-powers http://www.europarl.europa.eu/about-parliament/en/powers-and... 'A Member of the European Parliament, working in one of the parliamentary committees, draws up a report on a proposal for a ‘legislative text’ presented by the European Commission, the only institution empowered to initiate legislation.' I guess in a way the EU commission has a similar Veto power that the US president has except it possible for the legislature in the US to override the President's Veto power.

tialaramex 8y ago

Historically there was only one lobby (after all it's not usual to deliberately build rooms with two lobbies) and so parliament would do divisions like this: When the question is asked, it would be decided which alternative most preserves the status quo. Supporters of the contrary opinion must leave their seats and go into the lobby, those content would remain. This way if everybody is too lazy to get up and vote, nothing happens. But of course this makes it key to find ways to make your side of the question be the one that stays seated, as you'll thereby pick up all the lazy or incompetent votes. So the rebuilt Palace has two lobbies, and remaining in your seat now is an abstention (you can also just vote twice, once each way, if you are concerned that some mischief will be attempted with the lists of voters, but though it's not forbidden this is a huge waste of people's time in tabulating the votes and so it's frowned upon). Thomas Jefferson describes the old system because that's what was in place when he wrote about it.