Thanks for your heartfelt comment. I think the value of an unedited list is that those of us who want/need to learn about all the choices can do so without having to stumble into witness candidates by choice. Without having a central place for all witness candidates to be seen, we are left with the same problem of 'pay to play' being exacerbated, since those with the biggest wallets and ability to have their posts seen will be the ones who are best known as witnesses, while those with smaller budgets will not be seen at all. Not having any list would be like allowing small, independent political candidates in an election, but not having their name on the ballot papers - except there is an 'other' field you could write their name into if you happen to have heard of them. Ballot papers are a kind of advertising in and of themselves if they are honest and complete. The voter might not randomly choose a new candidate on the basis of the paper, but at least they can go and research the names they seen on it for next time.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Mhhmm, guess you are right, the wallet factor would remain even without a 'centralized' list.
I need to research this more before I waste more of your time, as in how people get on that ballot to begin with. Guess I will talk to my favorite directly and ask whether he would WANT to be on there and if so, how the community supporting him can help him do that.
Thanks for your reply to my somewhat overemotional comment - (money-influenced) politics remains one of my least favorite topics of our era and I get frustrated with it rather quickly. Happy you are voteable at least, will dig to find the others that I want to support on the ballot, as long as that current way of handling it stands.
You are welcome - poly-ticks is absolutely a problem and not a solution!