At 18:50 13/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
>On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 06:38:45PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> >
> > Democracy is overrated. I think a meritocracy is needed. Perhaps
> measured by
> > Perl competence.
>
>It's a fairly well-arguable stance that *any* form of meritocracy is a
>reasonable system - certainly an improvement on, for example, a
>hereditary (mon|poly)archy.
Nah. I think meritocracies degenerate rapidly into self perpetuating
oligarchies. The current ruling set starts to define 'merit' such that the
friends and co-conspirators and like mindeds of the ruling set remain in
power. Wasn't ICANN meant to be a meritocracy?
Actually, a hereditary democratic chamber such as the (old) house of lords
strikes me as being a pretty good system. Swapping 'randomly selected' for
hereditary would be a small improvement, possibly. Swapping 'selected by
Tony Blair after consultation with his own sycophantic smile' for
hereditary strikes me as pretty ******** stupid, corrupt and evil. Cough.
--
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
