Yes, the one that Carrol was talking about where 50% or so does not even vote. I see the confusion: you are reading me as calling the non-drill-hole crowd the "real world". That's not whom I am talking about. I am talking about the general population where a majority (at least a non-absolute majority, referred to in the US as a plurality) opts out, in effect saying "none of the above". LBO members did not choose that option, though they had it.
> The drill option was away of saying "don't force me to do
> this," at least not in a year divisible by 4.
I think this meta-usage of a voting option might be unique to you. ;-) I assume (wrongly?) that most of the hole-drillers choose that option to express disgust for the candidates, not for the process.
> "None of the above"
> suggests openness to an unnamed option rather than rejection of the
> whole process. You make it sound like childish contrariness when it's
> actually the expression of a ripened disgust.
No value judgement was implied on my part! But if you are right, that the hole drillers were opposing the process, then it is crucial to know how many of them listed a second, third and further choices.
Surely you are kidding me... a post calling for participation of a few seconds in a silly online poll can at the least be ignored? Let us not forget that you, the man behind the hole-drilling option, IIRC, actually went out and voted on Nov 7!
--ravi