3 ms·

Low turnout elections are antidemocratic by nature. I'd venture there are many more e-scooter users in Paris than voters in this referendum.

parineum 4y ago
Not voting is a "whatever is fine with me" vote. Turnout doesn't matter as long as there isn't mass disenfranchisement.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> low turnout elections are antidemocratic This is a feature. Democracy is government by the people. Not by their whimsy. If it isn’t worth the inconvenience of voting, that might be a sign.
- imoverclocked 4y ago
  Sometimes what is being voted on is unclear. Names/monickers are often misleading. The description text of bills can seem contradictory to the advertising about them. This is all before we get into gerrymandering and other patterns to shape voting outcomes. It’s not always about apathy.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > what is being voted on is unclear. Names/monickers are often misleading. The description text of bills can seem contradictory to the advertising about them. Which is why direct democracy rarely works. And again, if someone is dissuaded from voting on the basis of how a bill sounds versus taking the time to learn what it is, I’m still chalking that up as a feature. Gerrymandering is a problem, but not an excuse for apathy—not every issue, local to national, is gerrymandered.
least 4y ago
It's a ban on the rental companies, not e-scooters themselves.
foobar1962 4y ago
There is a difference between "not eligible to vote" which is arguably anti-democratic, and "chose not to vote" which is arguably democratic. Would making voting at elections compulsory make them more democratic?
zdragnar 4y ago
There's a pretty big difference between a person who owns and uses an e-scooter (not banned) versus rentals (banned). I don't know about Paris, but in the earlier days of e-thing rentals (especially when Lime first came to our area), they were treated like trash. Users would dump them where ever they were done with them, often in the middle of the sidewalk or on people's lawns. Their batteries didn't last a full day so they'd often end up cluttering areas until the company came around and picked them up. I think I'd have preferred to see something along the lines of unpleasant fines for leaving them anywhere other than a designated drop-off location, plus perhaps electronic governors limiting speed if that was an issue. That said, if Paris doesn't have the ability to make and enforce such mandates, then a ban on nuisance business makes sense to me.
- htag 4y ago
  > I think I'd have preferred to see something along the lines of unpleasant fines for leaving them anywhere other than a designated drop-off location, plus perhaps electronic governors limiting speed if that was an issue. Maybe you missed this sentence in the article? "Paris’s regulatory scheme, which automatically limited the top speed of the scooters and required users to use dedicated parking areas or pay fines"
gonzo41 4y ago
Australia, by accident got compulsory voting because no one was showing up. Turns out to be the best things since sliced bread.

parineum 4y ago

Not voting is a "whatever is fine with me" vote. Turnout doesn't matter as long as there isn't mass disenfranchisement.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> low turnout elections are antidemocratic This is a feature. Democracy is government by the people. Not by their whimsy. If it isn’t worth the inconvenience of voting, that might be a sign.

imoverclocked 4y ago
Sometimes what is being voted on is unclear. Names/monickers are often misleading. The description text of bills can seem contradictory to the advertising about them. This is all before we get into gerrymandering and other patterns to shape voting outcomes. It’s not always about apathy.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > what is being voted on is unclear. Names/monickers are often misleading. The description text of bills can seem contradictory to the advertising about them. Which is why direct democracy rarely works. And again, if someone is dissuaded from voting on the basis of how a bill sounds versus taking the time to learn what it is, I’m still chalking that up as a feature. Gerrymandering is a problem, but not an excuse for apathy—not every issue, local to national, is gerrymandered.

least 4y ago

It's a ban on the rental companies, not e-scooters themselves.

foobar1962 4y ago

There is a difference between "not eligible to vote" which is arguably anti-democratic, and "chose not to vote" which is arguably democratic. Would making voting at elections compulsory make them more democratic?

zdragnar 4y ago

There's a pretty big difference between a person who owns and uses an e-scooter (not banned) versus rentals (banned). I don't know about Paris, but in the earlier days of e-thing rentals (especially when Lime first came to our area), they were treated like trash. Users would dump them where ever they were done with them, often in the middle of the sidewalk or on people's lawns. Their batteries didn't last a full day so they'd often end up cluttering areas until the company came around and picked them up. I think I'd have preferred to see something along the lines of unpleasant fines for leaving them anywhere other than a designated drop-off location, plus perhaps electronic governors limiting speed if that was an issue. That said, if Paris doesn't have the ability to make and enforce such mandates, then a ban on nuisance business makes sense to me.

htag 4y ago
> I think I'd have preferred to see something along the lines of unpleasant fines for leaving them anywhere other than a designated drop-off location, plus perhaps electronic governors limiting speed if that was an issue. Maybe you missed this sentence in the article? "Paris’s regulatory scheme, which automatically limited the top speed of the scooters and required users to use dedicated parking areas or pay fines"

gonzo41 4y ago

Australia, by accident got compulsory voting because no one was showing up. Turns out to be the best things since sliced bread.