4 ms·

It's also possible some just understood the question incorrectly or confused it with something else There are a couple of explanations being floated. First of

by dagw 8y ago

It's also possible some just understood the question incorrectly or confused it with something else There are a couple of explanations being floated. First of all there where two votes, not just one, and if you wanted to vote 'correctly' against A13 you had to vote NO on the first vote and YES on the second (or vice versa to support A13), The people who voted 'wrong' voted either NO to both or YES to both. Secondly apparently the order of voting was changed at the last minute (there where a whole bunch of things being voted on that day) so people who had written down what they where going to vote on each issue (NO,NO,YES,NO,YES,YES,NO etc.) and missed that the order had changed would end up voting wrong. Ie. they knew they wanted to vote YES on issue 27, but issue 27 was actually the 28th item voted for that day. At least two MEPs in Sweden are using this excuse. But basically a bunch of MEPs just didn't think it was that important to pay attention to the details, phoned it in, and screwed up badly.

sc11 8y ago
> But basically a bunch of MEPs just didn't think it was that important to pay attention to the details, phoned it in, and screwed up badly. Indeed. Epicenter.works published a table[1] to make it easier for people unfamiliar with the voting system to follow along. It uses the same template that the MEPs use, except with the "Vote" section filled in from the perspective of someone against Art. 11/13. This might make it easier to understand why this mistake could happen but it seems clear enough that, if you're actually paying attention, you could avoid mistakes on such an important issue. [1] https://epicenter.works/sites/default/files/copyright_dsm_final_vote_vl_0.pdf https://epicenter.works/sites/default/files/copyright_dsm_fi... (PDF)
- dagw 8y ago
  you could avoid mistakes on such an important issue I think the other issue is that for you and me and everybody here this is a super important issue, but for many of the MEPs it's just confusing regulation nr. 843 they have to vote on this year.
  - tgragnato 8y ago
    If it was like this, then laws and regulations would have no real value and no authority whatsoever.
    - blibble 8y ago
      have you watched a video of how they vote? it's a complete joke, it goes so fast the interpreters can't keep up and people end up making constant mistakes https://youtu.be/zLh9DMuetm4?t=58 https://youtu.be/zLh9DMuetm4?t=58
      - tgragnato 8y ago
        It always happens to make mistakes, I just don’t believe MEPs don’t care of the hot topic of the day every newspaper is writing about...
        Vinnl 8y ago
        On the news channel I follow, at least three votes were highlighted (this one, one about adding a few countries to a list of tax havens, and one about ending the timezone switching).
      - msie 8y ago
        This is so horrible yet I am not surprised. You'd think that at some age people would achieve a certain level of competency.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
welterde 8y ago
> There are a couple of explanations being floated. First of all there where two votes, not just one, and if you wanted to vote 'correctly' against A13 you had to vote NO on the first vote and YES on the second (or vice versa to support A13), The people who voted 'wrong' voted either NO to both or YES to both. I think it was the other way around actually. They first voted on whether to allow an last batch of amendments, which would have allowed separate voting on article 11 and 13 (and this vote failed by 5 votes). Then only after that they voted on the real deal.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
PhasmaFelis 8y ago
Some people are saying that the voting order was switched deliberately, knowing that some MEPs write down their votes in advance.
noahl 8y ago
Yes, paying attention to detail is important. But you would never say this about an engineering system. If you had to make a series of poorly-marked binary choices in a certain order to correctly deploy a bugfix, and someone got that wrong, the postmortem would be about what a terrible UI that is and how it has to be changed to improve system reliability. An operator making an easy-to-make mistake would never be considered "at fault". That's how we treat things that really matter for websites. Voting in parliament is a lot more important than that. I'd rather see a real postmortem and plan for improvement, not blaming the users.
- nitrogen 8y ago
  had to make a series of poorly-marked binary choices in a certain order to correctly deploy a bugfix Unfortunately this is not uncommon. Tools like Jira are sometimes configured with a maze of steps and jumps around the UI (buttons, fields, dropdowns, popovers in various orders) to get a ticket into the correct state.

by dagw 8y ago

sc11 8y ago

> But basically a bunch of MEPs just didn't think it was that important to pay attention to the details, phoned it in, and screwed up badly. Indeed. Epicenter.works published a table[1] to make it easier for people unfamiliar with the voting system to follow along. It uses the same template that the MEPs use, except with the "Vote" section filled in from the perspective of someone against Art. 11/13. This might make it easier to understand why this mistake could happen but it seems clear enough that, if you're actually paying attention, you could avoid mistakes on such an important issue. [1] https://epicenter.works/sites/default/files/copyright_dsm_final_vote_vl_0.pdf https://epicenter.works/sites/default/files/copyright_dsm_fi... (PDF)

dagw 8y ago
you could avoid mistakes on such an important issue I think the other issue is that for you and me and everybody here this is a super important issue, but for many of the MEPs it's just confusing regulation nr. 843 they have to vote on this year.
- tgragnato 8y ago
  If it was like this, then laws and regulations would have no real value and no authority whatsoever.
  - blibble 8y ago
    have you watched a video of how they vote? it's a complete joke, it goes so fast the interpreters can't keep up and people end up making constant mistakes https://youtu.be/zLh9DMuetm4?t=58 https://youtu.be/zLh9DMuetm4?t=58
    - tgragnato 8y ago
      It always happens to make mistakes, I just don’t believe MEPs don’t care of the hot topic of the day every newspaper is writing about...
      - Vinnl 8y ago
        On the news channel I follow, at least three votes were highlighted (this one, one about adding a few countries to a list of tax havens, and one about ending the timezone switching).
    - msie 8y ago
      This is so horrible yet I am not surprised. You'd think that at some age people would achieve a certain level of competency.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

welterde 8y ago

> There are a couple of explanations being floated. First of all there where two votes, not just one, and if you wanted to vote 'correctly' against A13 you had to vote NO on the first vote and YES on the second (or vice versa to support A13), The people who voted 'wrong' voted either NO to both or YES to both. I think it was the other way around actually. They first voted on whether to allow an last batch of amendments, which would have allowed separate voting on article 11 and 13 (and this vote failed by 5 votes). Then only after that they voted on the real deal.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

PhasmaFelis 8y ago

Some people are saying that the voting order was switched deliberately, knowing that some MEPs write down their votes in advance.

noahl 8y ago

Yes, paying attention to detail is important. But you would never say this about an engineering system. If you had to make a series of poorly-marked binary choices in a certain order to correctly deploy a bugfix, and someone got that wrong, the postmortem would be about what a terrible UI that is and how it has to be changed to improve system reliability. An operator making an easy-to-make mistake would never be considered "at fault". That's how we treat things that really matter for websites. Voting in parliament is a lot more important than that. I'd rather see a real postmortem and plan for improvement, not blaming the users.

nitrogen 8y ago
had to make a series of poorly-marked binary choices in a certain order to correctly deploy a bugfix Unfortunately this is not uncommon. Tools like Jira are sometimes configured with a maze of steps and jumps around the UI (buttons, fields, dropdowns, popovers in various orders) to get a ticket into the correct state.