It’s entirely possible, of course, that members of the Electoral College have simply been ‘parking’ their votes with him (an eminently safe choice – he’s well regarded by all, francophone and from Pentecost) until such time as they can organise support for their intended candidate. Sort of like showing a jack in order to hide your ace.

No doubt, the horse-trading is well under way by now. I doubt there are more than four or five individuals in the entire country who understand the complex, downright byzantine mechanics of Vanuatu politics well enough to comfortably predict how this will play out. The rest of us will just have to wait and see….

Among the gems of logic provided by members of the Electoral College to justify their opposition to the mere idea of a female President is this one:

1. Vanuatu is a constitutional democracy;
2. The Constitution says that we’re guided by Christian principles;
3. So we should listen to St. Paul when he says that women are not the head of the family;
4. Therefore, a woman cannot be the head of the larger family of Vanuatu.

Needless to say, the letters section of this weekend’s paper was chock-a-block with equally candid rebuttals, at least one of which suggested that this constitutional scholar might want to read a short way past the preamble, to the part where it says that it’s illegal to discriminate against anyone based on their sex.

Despite such spot-on responses as this, it’s clear that the rank and file – the MPs, chiefs and provincial & municipal executives who constitute the Electoral College – are probably the least ready segment of Vanuatu today to accept the idea of being led by a woman. Heck, they have a hard enough time letting a… well, anyone lead them.

It’s pretty common knowledge that UMP leader Serge Vohor rarely acts without something to motivate him. His level of commitment to the actual election of a woman as head of state is probably best indicated by his canny decision to get two women to contest, virtually guaranteeing a split vote among the few who might conceivably be convinced to support the idea.

So what – or, more to the point, who – is behind this sudden buzz of interest in a female President?

12pm today
CANDIDATE	 VOTES

Bakoa Kaltongga            (VP)       1485
Kalsakau Steven            (UMP)      1039
Alfred R Carlot            (VRP)       984
Jimmy Luna Tasong          (IND)       938
Joshua Tafura Kalsakau     (VLP)       916
Kalmele Matai              (VP)        791
Barak Tame Sope Mautamate  (MPP)       780
Roro Sambo                 (Alliance)  685
Pastor William Malas       (NCAP)      573
Andrew Samuel              (TKP)       449
Ephraim Kalsakau           (IND)       336
Eric Pakoa Marakiwola      (IND)       217
Harry Man Kalsong          (VDPP)      213
Lily Lui                   (IND)       175
Warewo Rave Chilia         (NUP)       137
Jean Pierre Serel          (IND)       107
Kaltang Joel               (Alliance)   84
Hendon Kalsakau            (IND)        41

Total Registered Voters:   21282
Votes Cast:                 9950
Turn Out %:                46.75

These numbers are UNofficial. We reserve the right to be wrong in every regard.

In a recently published book with the rather unoriginal title ‘Free’, Wired Magazine editor Chris Anderson makes the case that digital technology is driving the price of nearly everything associated with it to zero. Anderson describes how services like Youtube are prevented from ever charging money to access their content because it’s trivially easy to get the same material for free from other sources. Adding even a single penny in cost creates a psychological barrier high enough to make your service unattractive to potential visitors.

Writer Tim Lee puts it like this: “It costs more than 10 cents to charge someone 10 cents. As a consequence, if the equilibrium price of your product is less than 10 cents, it’s stupid to charge for it because all the revenues will go to the credit card company.”

This has major media companies in a tizzy. If they can’t charge for their content online, and if online content is killing their real-world products, how can they compete?

Most people reduce it to this: ‘If I can’t make money at it, how can I do it?’ The assumption that time equals money is treated as axiomatic and goes unchallenged. If you need to spend time doing something in order to become good at it, then you have to get paid to do it. Which leads to the corollary: If you can’t make something pay, there’s no incentive to do it.

But watch what happens when we change just two words: ‘If I can’t make money at it, why should I do it?’ The answer is simple, and perfectly clear:

You do it because it’s important.

Cash value is an important measuring stick. The more tightly integrated the economy, the louder money talks. In Vanuatu, with its significantly un-integrated economy, money still talks, but we don’t always have to listen.

More accurately, money is not the only thing we listen to. Family and friends, church and community all demand our attention, effort and even wealth. We don’t make any money by contributing, but they’re important nonetheless.

The hardware platform we need to stand on to access the Internet is still far from Free. It will be years before the entire population can log in with the same ease and convenience as a roadside chat with a tawian. But it will inevitably drop into reach.

It’s useful and necessary to take steps to ensure that the cost of communications continues its descent toward Free. But it’s equally important that get ready to make use of the wealth that it bestows.

The philosophy of Free on the Internet meshes nearly perfectly with some of the core tenets of community and kastom. Vanuatu, with its natural bounty, has long traded in a gift economy. Traditionally, a person’s rank in the community is measured in terms of the wealth they can bestow on others.

But how do we translate a decidedly rare resource like pigs into Internet terms? Wisdom, insight and information all fit the bill. Specialised knowledge, expert insight and that rarest of rarities, true wisdom will always be in short supply. By developing an online culture where this knowledge is shared and applied responsibly, we can transpose one of the most desirable aspects of real-world Vanuatu onto its virtual counterpart.

Sharing information and knowledge is an often tricky task. It’s never enough simply to dump a bunch of arcane details into someone’s inbox. Unless the meaning is clear, it’s just noise. But filtering information, culling the digital wheat from the chaff, requires a degree of subjectivity and bias. It’s unavoidable. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, if the result is that we get some keen or unique insight into the matter.

Public knowledge should serve the public good, and that requires that we put aside our personal rivalries and agendas, or at least only indulge them to the extent that the community as a whole can profit. The best way to mitigate the blinder effect that arises from writing from your own perspective is make sure you’re not the only voice. When fact and counterfactual are placed side by side with one another, it becomes easier to see what’s what.

Readers need to be critical, even skeptical, of the material they find online. There’s got to be a little editor – and author – in everyone. Making comment threads and a ratings system available go a long way for engaged and interested readers to have a hand in improving the system.

If this is going to work, it requires that we all be able to participate. This requires a concentrated collective effort. Building a public forum is one thing, but we also need to be able to access that forum and, once we’re there, we need to play an active role.

If it does work, Free will help us rebuild our intellectual and cultural freedom.