[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't follow. If voting is a waste of time, what difference does it make how anybody votes?

[/ QUOTE ]

Voting is a waste of time because of the unlikelihood of one vote deciding the election. Convincing a large block of voters has a greater chance of effecting the election there fore if a person can increase his votes altered to time ratio he may arrive at a point where his efforts will bring about a situation that he deems worthwhile.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, by conceding this, you're conceding that voting produces worthwhile consequences. How can we come to any other conclusion?

I don't see how we can claim "X is a time wasting activity" out of one-side of our mouths, but then out of the other say "convincing other people to engage in time wasting activity X will be productive". If Activity X is time wasting, nothing productive can come of it, by definition, unless "time wasting" has some new meaning I'm not aware of.

Maybe this is one big false dichotomy, but I'm not seeing the alternatives here.