Klarinet Archive - Posting 000018.txt from 2000/01
From: Tony@-----.uk (Tony Pay)
Subj: RE: [kl] The Top Ten...
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 14:42:21 -0500
On Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:11:17 -0800, kevinfay@-----.com said:
> Tony Pay opined:
>
> > I'd say that, though there are advantages too, one of the
> > disadvantages of running (for example) an orchestra democratically
> > is that some people think we ought to find out *what everyone
> > thinks* about some issue. And because some people haven't ever
> > thought about that issue, because it wasn't real to them, what we
> > get is their ******* opinions, which we should never have had to
> > take into account in the first place.
I'd say that was a fact. It *is* one of the disadvantages. (Unless you
want to say that *everything* is an opinion, which of course is always a
possible move.)
It's not enough of a disadvantage to deter us from democracy in this
case, perhaps, but it's enough of one to make it clear to us that some
opinions may not be worth very much.
Sometimes I do even notice that *my* opinion isn't worth very much,
believe it or not. Often in such a case I don't even know what my
opinion is, so I don't give it. On the other hand, sometimes,
particularly when I have arguments to support my opinion, and its being
taken seriously may make a difference to something important (and here
of course you could use the move above again, and say that the
importance itself is just a matter of opinion) I might fight very
strongly to have it noticed.
Suppose that these wonderful 10 clarinet players had to be chosen to
play some piece for 10 clarinets, say -- then there might be more point
to the discussion.
(Or not:-)
Actually, the list might change a bit if we were doing something real.
You guys can fill in the factual details....who couldn't stand who....
> This is an intrinsic problem in any organization where everybody gets
> the same vote no matter how much the issue is held dear. This is true
> of most governmental elections. There have been other schemes
> invented allowing voters to "weight" their votes -- the primary
> example that comes to mind is cumulative voting for corporate
> directors under most U.S. corporate laws. Under cumulative voting, the
> voter gets 1 vote per share for each slot on the board, and can pile
> them up for the one candidate that they really, really want to be
> elected. (So ,for example, if there are 3 directors, you could cast 3
> votes per share owned for 1 candidate, greatly increasing their
> chances of election). This hasn't been tried on a government election
> that I know of, but has been used by some labor unions. Lani Gunier
> was lambasted for suggesting that it be used to ensure proportional
> representation along racial lines here in the U.S.
>
> In *my* opinion, not terribly efficient.
Well, I wasn't after making a pronouncement on problems of this order of
difficulty. What you say is probably true. Look at the terrible
trouble they have with religious fundamentalism in Israel under a
proportional representation system that ensures small majorities for
whatever government.
> Tony opined further:
>
> > Actually, if it actually interests you to find out people's opinions,
> > you should probably do it late at night, with a bottle of whiskey.
> > That way, you can sort out all the world's problems as well.
Yeah, OK, that was an opinion -- but, you have to admit, with 'probably'
as a hedge in it.
> . . . after rehearsals (which occur for me mostly in the evening), we
> generally prefer beer. A matter of opinion, of course.
In my experience, you don't get down to the real rock-bottom horror of
the situation using beer:-)
Tony
--
_________ Tony Pay
|ony:-) 79 Southmoor Rd Tony@-----.uk
| |ay Oxford OX2 6RE GMN family artist: www.gmn.com
tel/fax 01865 553339
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org
