• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

148 Neutral

About ManaStone

  • Rank
  1. Finally, somebody is trying to do something about our horrible uncompetitive first-past-the-post voting system. Mark Frohnmayer, co-founder of GarageGames, is trying to get 87,213 signatures to get a measure on a ballot in Oregon to change the voting system to an approval primary. This would be like the non-partisan primaries in California, except approval voting would be used to get the top two candidates. That means the two best candidates would be facing off in the general instead of the two that survived the vote spitting process.   If you live in Oregon, or have relatives that live in Oregon, make sure you and your friends sign this petition and vote for this initiative when it is on the ballot. You can find out more information here . Also, make sure you like it on facebook .   This is the most pragmatic solution to first-past-the-post voting system and extra competition will make sure the politicians are held accountable. Also, Oregon voters will be able to vote their conscience without being punished for it with the worst candidate winning.
  2. Ok, nevermind this. I found the problem. I took a closer look at the contents with the jar tool and it appears that I downloaded the documentation files instead of the class files. I apologize if I wasted anyone's time.
  3. Actually, I retried that javax thing and I am not getting the error I got before. So I guess you are right, that isn't the problem.
  4. I think that is the thing that is causing me trouble because I tried creating a test package called javax and it gave me the same problem when trying to import it from a jar file. I renamed it to javax2 and it resolved the issue. It appears to be a naming conflict.
  5. I'm downloaded the jgoodies jar file, but I can't import it right now because the first package inside it is named "com" and there is already a "com" package in one of the default global libraries. Is there anyway I can get around the naming ambiguatiy so I can import the jgoodies package? Is there a tool I can use to rename the package inside the jar file from "com" to "com2"?
  6. [quote name='mdwh' timestamp='1327930535' post='4907615'] Even if all third parties unite, at least in the UK and US they wouldn't manage to ever be one of the two main parties. Although yes, I share your dislike of FPTP. [/quote] The goal wouldn't really be to become a major party. It would be just a temporary alliance to change the voting system. It would have a simple message and disband after it achieves its goal. In the US, this could be done state by state and the party wouldn't have to worry about federal elections. The party could raise money nationally and become a powerhouse in a small state by focusing all resources there. After each victory, the party will have more notoriety and subsequent victories would be easier to achieve with fewer resources.
  7. [quote name='Sirisian' timestamp='1327827587' post='4907276'] We've had a [url=""]few posts[/url] (can't seem to find the recent ones. The new site seems to have crippled google's index maybe) regarding switching to instant run-off voting. I don't think the current two parties would allow it. [/quote] I was actually the one that started that thread. I changed my position about IRV since then. IRV is better than plurality, but it still has a lot of problems and you can still screw yourself over pretty easily by voting your conscience with it. I think the most pragmatic solution is to have an open primary with [url=""]approval voting[/url] and let the top two candidates face off in the general election.
  8. All third parties have a common problem; it is extremely difficult for them to gain traction due to our first-past-the-post voting system. Wouldn't it make more sense to unite into one big tent party with the single goal of changing to a voting system that doesn't split the vote? There could be inner parties such as the Greens or Libertarians, and they can have their own primary within the primary. The parties primary election could use the [url=""]Condorcet method[/url] to elect its candidate and everyone within the party would be obliged to support the winner regardless of what other political positions that candidate has. After they change the voting system, the parties can split ways. Is there any reason why third parties shouldn't do this?
  9. Avoiding polymorphism in Java

    [quote name='Alessio89' timestamp='1325715153' post='4899727'] post an example of that constructor issue... do you remember how constructors works with subclassing and the role of the "super" keyword? [/quote] The problem was that the overwriting function was using objects in the the derived class before they had a chance to initialize. I used a null check to solve it. It was a simple fix, but I just thought it might be useful to know how to explicitly choose which version to use just in case a more complex situation arises.
  10. Avoiding polymorphism in Java

    [quote name='Telastyn' timestamp='1325713684' post='4899714'] Why would you want to? In general, if you run into this sort of thing where it's hard to do something in the language, it's a hint [i]not to do that.[/i] [/quote] Polymorphism caused a problem in one of my programs when a constructor called the wrong function. I've settled the problem, but I would like to be able to avoid in the future.
  11. Is there a way I can explicitly avoid polymorphism is Java? For example, in the following code: [CODE] public class Main { public static void main(String[] args) { new Main().Run(); } public void Run() { ClassB b = new ClassB(); b.doThing(); } public class ClassA { public void doThing() { print(); } public void print() { System.out.println("A"); } } class ClassB extends ClassA { public void print() { System.out.println("B"); } } } [/CODE] Is there anyway I can write doThing() so that it always calls the ClassA version of print so that when the program runs it prints “A” instead of “B”
  12. Is there a Firefox addon that allows me to do this?

    Ok nevermind, I searched a little harder and I think I found something called cookieswap. I'm sorry for making an unnecessary post.
  13. Is there any Firefox add-on that allows me to create different users and lets me have separate cookies for each user? I created my Youtube account with a different email than my gmail account a while back and now I can't be auto logged in to both at the same time. It would be so much easier if I could just switch users and automatically load in different cookies associated with that user as if I created a different windows account. Is there any add-on that already exists for Firefox that allows me to do this?
  14. Cenk Uygur and approval voting

    [quote name='Khaiy' timestamp='1313537280' post='4850082'] Besides, while it's quite well established that people are disgusted with both major US parties at present, it's also well established that they tend to view [i]their own[/i] representatives much more favorably. Also, I don't know that a different voting system would necessarily make politicians more accountable. They'll always have a huge incentive to try and slink out of responsibility, and most citizens are unsophisticated enough in at least one area of government controversy at any given time that they can be misled or otherwise distracted.[/quote] I think if they had more competition, the incumbents would have to work harder to stay elected. The incumbent very rarely gets challenged in a primary and he knows that his base is stuck with him. If we had an open primary with approval voting and a top two runoff for the Presidential election in 2012, I don't think there is any way Obama would get reelected. And maybe for the most part a different voting system won't change the behavior of politicians. Getting rid of vote splitting though would at the very least help us get rid of incumbents that step too far out of line. [quote] I'm still in favor of systems like ranked choice voting (very much so, though on review the above may not make it seem like it). My state is trying to pass ranked-choice voting statewide, against fierce opposition. California has open primaries, now though it's too early for the full effects of that to be known. I would love to see elections reflect the will of the voters, and the current system is quite poor at that. But at the same time, I'm not confident that a better voting system will resolve most of the serious issues that we have. [/quote] RCV in the form of IRV is better than plurality, but it gives unintuitive results. Burlington, Vermont used it for a while and in the 2009 mayoral election it didn't produce the Condorcet winner. A bunch of people freaked out and they repealed it through referendum. The problem now is that they are going to be more resistant to try another voting system. Approval voting would be much easier to implement and explain to people. Ideally I think the ranked pairs form of the Condorcet method would be the best method, but it would be hard to explain that to people and get them to support it. Also, it would be a nightmare to implement. I don't think the open primaries with plurality will help much because it doesn't stop the problems of vote splitting. Two candidates who are unpopular can make it into the general election.
  15. Cenk Uygur and approval voting

    [quote name='freddyscoming4you' timestamp='1313526458' post='4850027'] As long as the Electoral College exists voting is effectively broken in America as the people. Gore got the popular vote and should have won in 2000. This last decade could have been dramatically different from what we have today. [/quote] That is only for the President. Our strategy should be to get approval voting implemented state by state. That way we could elect better senators and representatives and each state victory will help build momentum. Once we are able to elect better candidates it will be a lot easier to change the electoral college. Ideally we'd have non-partisan open primaries with approval voting and the let the top two face of in the general.