Anyway, here's the breakdown:
- Tinker 7
- Tailor 1
- Soldier 2
- Sailor 2
- Rich man 0
- Poor man 0
- Beggar man 2
- Thief 2
Only one tailor. That's fair, we can't all be fashion mavens, strutting the catwalks of Milan. But someone should, and I'm glad it's you. Good luck! I reckon you'll be busier than all those tinkers, squabbling over my poor old kettle.
Two soldiers. That surprised me a little, since the job description is basically to lie in mud and be shot at. If I'd offered the Air Force rather than the Army I'd expect more responses since their job is to sit around in air-conditioned comfort and drink coffee, waiting for the runway to be cleared. But soldiering? What's the thinking behind that?
Two sailors as well. This is natural. The romantic among us will naturally yearn for the solace of the ocean's misty embrace. But she's a harsh mistress, arrr!
And finally, the last four choices show a resounding repudiation of modern capitalism. The notion of defining your career solely by your level of capital accumulation was rejected outright with no-one choosing to be a rich man or a poor man, and four of you even chose to turn your backs on the idea of private property by being beggars and thieves! But consider this: how will you afford your John Butler Trio CDs with no job, huh?
Tinkers, a tailor, soldiers, sailors, no-good hippy bums. What a motley rabble you are, gentle readers. I love youse all!
[Edit: new poll up and running, concerning the vitally important question of what noise is made by really big ray-guns...]
Posts
12 comments:
PTR,
Two words (which I've helpfully numbered for clarity = (-1) "vote" & (-2) "donkey".
I'm reporting you to the AEC for not having randomised the ballot paper!
I did randomize the ballot paper. It just happened to come out the same way as the original each time.
Never tell me the odds!
Sorry but I voted for beggar twice. Don't want to burst your bubble but thought you should know.
Oh, good democracy skills mate. Is your surname Bjelke-Petersen perchance?
I too skewed the results in favour of tinker...
Sigh.
I voted for soldier twice... because I knew nobody else would.
How ironic that the original Anonymous wanted to report me to the AEC. I should have reported myself for allowing you eeeediots to vote when you have a mental age of 12.
If the labor party have their way, people with the mental age of 12 will be allowed to vote soon anyway...
What does that mean???
You didn't read the article in the Australian (or see the news on the same day) about labor wanting to change the voting age to 16 then...
No, I don't read The Australian. It makes me full of rage.
Still there's no excuse for me not being aware of a piece of bizarre news like that.
I think it would have been okay to do something like this back in the late 80's when children were given decent educations at school and had some moral fibre. But the kids today just aren't of the same calibre. They're all off having porns and smoking wii-pipes or whatever you call them. Absolute duds, the lot of them.
Post a Comment