[Wikipedia-l] Don't waste your vote!

[Andre Engels]

2007/7/1, Søren Kiersted <wisewisard at googlemail.com>:
> On 6/30/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> > candidate. It's possible that voting for extra people will prevent
> > your favourite candidate from winning, but voting for extra people can
> > never cause a candidate you didn't vote for to win.
>
> Voting for people who have little to no chance of winning is a lost
> chance to keep off the person you know is bad, a wasted vote.

No, it is not.

> People here seem to think that each person gets multiple votes, but
> that is not true. It would not be fair. You get one vote, and it says
> so on the voting page that only one vote is allowed per person no
> matter how many projects you are on.

But that vote can go to one, several or all candidates (although
voting for all candidates would of course not influence the effect).

> Right now people who like five people, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE but
> like ONE somewhat more than FOUR or FIVE will select only ONE, TWO and
> THREE so that their vote is not diluted with the result of FOUR being
> selected while ONE loses.

Will they? I don't see why they would vote exactly three, and not one or five.

> But this thinking is WRONG.  If ONE has
> little chance of winning, and SIX is the bad person, their vote may
> cause SIX to win.  So instead they should look at the endorsements
> page and only vote for people who are good and who are likely to win.

No. There is no harm done in ALSO voting for those who are good, but
have no chance to win.

> The omission of ONE will hurt no one if he is not likely to win, even
> if you know he is best.

The addition of ONE will also hurt no one.


-- 
Andre Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644  --  Skype: a_engels