Okay, but cheese does not win in this system because pepperoni lovers can tolerate it while vegetarians cannot eat pepperoni. Nor does it win because minorities are getting more representation in general. Cheese wins here purely because you’ve arranged the voting system to give more power to the ones you wanted to win.
Dividing each table into groups then adding them together- that’s a scam by a pepperoni fan because they will ensure every group has 5 known pepperoni lovers and 2 others.
If it’s possible to ensure such majority of pepperoni lovers in every single group, then pepperoni lovers have an overall majority. They don’t need scams to win. In fact - you’d need scams to prevent them from winning.
Cheese wins because we don’t ignore small tables, as a simple majority system would do. I think small tables deserve to have a voice for their needs, even if there are fewer of them. It’s not right to ignore an entire group of tables simply because fewer people sit at them.
If it’s possible to ensure such majority of pepperoni lovers in every single group, then pepperoni lovers have an overall majority. They don’t need scams to win. In fact - you’d need scams to prevent them from winning.
Not necessarily.
Let’s say you have 100 people. 60 want cheese, 40 want pepperoni.
You need to split this 100 people into 6 tables, each table will vote and submit their overall request. Whichever kind of pizza most of the tables request gets ordered.
There we go. I’ve just ‘fairly, evenly’ divided 100 people into 6 tables of 16-17 people each.
And thus with my ‘simple and unimportant’ job of assigning table seating, I’ve guaranteed that pepperoni will be ordered even though a majority of the people want cheese. Tables 1-4 will vote and pepperoni will win, tables 5-6 will unanimously agree on cheese, and when we ask the tables what they want 4 out of 6 tables will vote pepperoni. And thus the minority wins because the table seating was a scam.
If the tables were assigned randomly, or if a computer grouped the tables by similar interest, age, etc, we’d get something more like a fair vote.
Cheese wins because we don’t ignore small tables, as a simple majority system would do
Why do small tables deserve this special protection from being ignored? No other minority group is getting such protection. Minority races are ignored. Minority cultures are ignored. Minorities with special dietary needs - like vegetarians, the very minority you have used to justify inflating the voting power of the small tables - are ignored. What’s so special about being seated in a smaller table that warrants silencing the majority just so that you - a minority - won’t be ignored?
Note that I said “in every single group”, and I said you because you said “will ensure every group”.
I should have emphasized it…
If the tables were assigned randomly, or if a computer grouped the tables by similar interest, age, etc, we’d get something more like a fair vote.
Another way to “get something more like a fair vote” is to count the votes by person and not by table. Actually, this is not just “something more like” a fair vote - it’s the very idea (as in “Plato’s Theory of Ideas”) of a fair vote. This what we compare any drawing of district lines to determine how fair it is.
Vegetarians need more campaign skills. Really gotta convince the pepperoni people that their meat is played out.
Like, really, what’s so great about meat on a pizza? Especially pepperoni. Pepperoni is so played out. I could see like, maybe Buffalo chicken, or barbecue chicken, or sausage + peppers…but pepperoni? We gonna go to Starbucks after and get a PSL?
Not to mention, we had pepperoni last time and we all got sick, remember? We were stuck at home for like a whole year.
Anyways as a vegetarian, my vote would be for the Mediterranean pizza anyways. With the feta, spinach, kamalata olives…this place even puts on a balsamic drizzle. Way more interesting and flavorful.
That’s a good pizza. Variety of flavors. Pretends to be healthy and exotic. Not available at Chuck E. Cheese.
See, this way, not only did I pitch the preferred pizza, I also introduced additional contenders on the other side of the aisle. This will hopefully serve to split the vote enough to force a run-off. It’d probably still be between Pepperoni and Mediterranean, but now, hopefully enough of the Never-Peppers will realize that Pepperoni is the basic-bitch of meats, and if they can’t have buffalo then why even have meat?
Unfortunately, the vegan is like “Fuck all ya’ll, all of these options are supporting animal genocide, how could I vote for any of these?” and abstains, and manages to convince another Never-Pepper stand alone choosing salads for everyone. And then the rest of us all end up with Pepperoni. Again. And everyone gets heartburn, while me and the vegan starve. And the pigs still get slaughtered, and the cows still get raped, and we end up supporting the animal genocide even more. And the following year, the salad has cyclospora.
Okay, but cheese does not win in this system because pepperoni lovers can tolerate it while vegetarians cannot eat pepperoni. Nor does it win because minorities are getting more representation in general. Cheese wins here purely because you’ve arranged the voting system to give more power to the ones you wanted to win.
If it’s possible to ensure such majority of pepperoni lovers in every single group, then pepperoni lovers have an overall majority. They don’t need scams to win. In fact - you’d need scams to prevent them from winning.
Cheese wins because we don’t ignore small tables, as a simple majority system would do. I think small tables deserve to have a voice for their needs, even if there are fewer of them. It’s not right to ignore an entire group of tables simply because fewer people sit at them.
Not necessarily.
Let’s say you have 100 people. 60 want cheese, 40 want pepperoni.
You need to split this 100 people into 6 tables, each table will vote and submit their overall request. Whichever kind of pizza most of the tables request gets ordered.
You assign seating as follows:
Table 1- 10 pepperoni, 6 cheese
Table 2- 10 pepperoni, 7 cheese
Table 3- 10 pepperoni, 6 cheese
Table 4- 10 pepperoni, 7 cheese
Table 5- 17 cheese, no pepperoni
Table 6- 17 cheese, no pepperoni
There we go. I’ve just ‘fairly, evenly’ divided 100 people into 6 tables of 16-17 people each.
And thus with my ‘simple and unimportant’ job of assigning table seating, I’ve guaranteed that pepperoni will be ordered even though a majority of the people want cheese. Tables 1-4 will vote and pepperoni will win, tables 5-6 will unanimously agree on cheese, and when we ask the tables what they want 4 out of 6 tables will vote pepperoni. And thus the minority wins because the table seating was a scam.
If the tables were assigned randomly, or if a computer grouped the tables by similar interest, age, etc, we’d get something more like a fair vote.
Why do small tables deserve this special protection from being ignored? No other minority group is getting such protection. Minority races are ignored. Minority cultures are ignored. Minorities with special dietary needs - like vegetarians, the very minority you have used to justify inflating the voting power of the small tables - are ignored. What’s so special about being seated in a smaller table that warrants silencing the majority just so that you - a minority - won’t be ignored?
And yes, I understand that this is just an allegory, and in real life there can be reason to give this protection to small states, reasons that are not reflected when we think of them as tables. But please remember that the real reason in real life was to allow slavery states to utilize their slaves’ voting powers without actually allowing them to vote.
Note that I said “in every single group”, and I said you because you said “will ensure every group”.
I should have emphasized it…
Another way to “get something more like a fair vote” is to count the votes by person and not by table. Actually, this is not just “something more like” a fair vote - it’s the very idea (as in “Plato’s Theory of Ideas”) of a fair vote. This what we compare any drawing of district lines to determine how fair it is.
Vegetarians need more campaign skills. Really gotta convince the pepperoni people that their meat is played out.
Like, really, what’s so great about meat on a pizza? Especially pepperoni. Pepperoni is so played out. I could see like, maybe Buffalo chicken, or barbecue chicken, or sausage + peppers…but pepperoni? We gonna go to Starbucks after and get a PSL?
Not to mention, we had pepperoni last time and we all got sick, remember? We were stuck at home for like a whole year.
Anyways as a vegetarian, my vote would be for the Mediterranean pizza anyways. With the feta, spinach, kamalata olives…this place even puts on a balsamic drizzle. Way more interesting and flavorful.
That’s a good pizza. Variety of flavors. Pretends to be healthy and exotic. Not available at Chuck E. Cheese.
See, this way, not only did I pitch the preferred pizza, I also introduced additional contenders on the other side of the aisle. This will hopefully serve to split the vote enough to force a run-off. It’d probably still be between Pepperoni and Mediterranean, but now, hopefully enough of the Never-Peppers will realize that Pepperoni is the basic-bitch of meats, and if they can’t have buffalo then why even have meat?
Unfortunately, the vegan is like “Fuck all ya’ll, all of these options are supporting animal genocide, how could I vote for any of these?” and abstains, and manages to convince another Never-Pepper stand alone choosing salads for everyone. And then the rest of us all end up with Pepperoni. Again. And everyone gets heartburn, while me and the vegan starve. And the pigs still get slaughtered, and the cows still get raped, and we end up supporting the animal genocide even more. And the following year, the salad has cyclospora.
Happens all the damn time.