2006-12-22 04:10:43 · 15 answers · asked by big j 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Perhaps there should be different levels of participetion.
2006-12-22 04:46:32 · update #1
Sounds good on the surface, but then who would you and I have to talk to?
2006-12-22 04:12:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I only wish there was a site where intelligent questions and answers were available....It would be very interesting...maybe yahoo could develop one where you could be eliminated from the site if either your questions or your answers were just to hear/see yourself in print.
Maybe something like peer review. You could be excluded from the site if a certain number of questions or answers were reported by the people on the site that wanted to have a real dialog with someone with a genuine interest in knowledge...like more than a 5th grade mentality.
2006-12-22 04:56:05 · answer #2 · answered by USAjane 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that someone has to understand a thing about what they are voting. The very basis of the Constitution is that we have an informed public--freedom of the press ensures that. (Note: not commenting on how the press portrays a damned thing!) And in that there is an assumption that one who votes is exercising his/her right to do so under the provisions of the document that provides that right (to vote). You can say what you will, but remember, we only know so much about our candidates these days because of the modern media--the politicians, since the early days after the Revolution, have always had issues of one sort or another. By you even suggesting that you know more than someone else and this entitles you to more "privilige" that someone that you think does not deserve as much, says to me that you are not as politically apt as you ought to be. In other words, keep your vote to yourself and hope your candidate wins. (US Soldier)
2016-05-23 15:51:59 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am unclear as to which aptitudes they would need to demonstrate. To make it harder and more relevant they should have to pass an attitude test because that is where the problems seem to be.
2006-12-22 04:13:55 · answer #4 · answered by Rich Z 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well that would certainly reduce the ranks tremendously in here. This is a game that is supposed to exchange information and hopefully enlighten its members. If you have an aptitude test there would be very few of us left, that that would take all the fun out of this game.
2006-12-22 04:14:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
That would be nice but unfortunately discriminatory. That whole freedom of speech thing. Also yahoo is not our friend, they are a business. Their goal is to have as many people use their service as possible. This allows them to charge more for advertising and other revenue.
2006-12-22 04:18:05 · answer #6 · answered by only p 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People who are paid to post here to represent or disseminate a political view, should be required to identify themselves and their employers.
2006-12-22 04:15:12 · answer #7 · answered by Snowshoe 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nah, ignorance is more entertaining that literacy and aptitude. It's not like we're changing the world. Let's just keep it fun.
2006-12-22 04:13:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
The place would be desserted.
Think of this as a safe place to be an idiot. No one gets hurt.
2006-12-22 04:13:02 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Only in a communist state. And as for me, I am a Republican.
2006-12-22 04:12:55 · answer #10 · answered by Dog Lover 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋