On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 at 00:21, Steven D'Aprano email@example.com wrote:
But let's be fair to those who have put in the effort to make this work so far. "Disenfranchisement" is not even close to a fair criticism.
Frankly, I'm tired of being picked up on specifics of the wording I used. I felt that "disenfranchised" described how I feel pretty well. If you're saying that my understanding of the word is inaccurate, then fine, I'm happy you know better than me. But I explained my problem in more detail as well as stating the summary version - I can't find context or discussions, I don't have the time to become an expert in all the details but conversely I can't find out what those who *have* investigated the details think, etc etc.
It's an important decision, and one I care about, but not one that will massively affect my daily routine, so I want to be involved, but I don't have the means to do so to a level that matches its direct impact on me.
If "disenfranchised" isn't the right word for that, then fine, pick your own word and assume I used it. Or assume I just gave the longer explanation and didn't bother trying to offer a one word summary of how I feel.
I've explained my concern, I'm not going to debate whether my vocabulary is sufficient to summarise my intent accurately any further. Paul
 My problem! But a common situation in any voting process - do you expect to understand all the details of international policy before voting in an election?