Text 6923, 756 rader
Skriven 2013-12-09 16:14:13 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Kommentar till text 6882 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Why a vote cast is a vote cast
======================================
Brer Michiel van der Vlist wrote to Brer All about Why a vote cast is a
vote cast:
MvdV> In the 2010 FSTC election Björn Felten requested that
MvdV> he be allowed to correct his already cast vote. The
MvdV> EC responded with "let me sleep on it". This is a
MvdV> summary of the storm of protest that followed. Read
MvdV> and judge for yourself...
Bjorn wanted to change his vote, not correct a spelling error.
MvdV> ==== begin ====
MvdV> == 38937 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 16 Nov 10 18:22:54
MvdV> From : Ross Cassell 1:123/456
MvdV> To : Michiel van der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hello Michiel!
MvdV> 16 Nov 10 22:36, you wrote to Björn Felten:
MV>> Hmmm... I don't know. There is no provision in the rules
MV>> for changing a vote that is already cast. OTOH, the rules do
MV>> not forbid it either. I lean towards allowing it, but only
MV>> if there are no serious objections from the constituency.
MV>> It will set a precedent either way. So let me sleep on it.
MvdV> I protest in the name of protocol..
MvdV> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules.. Changing
MvdV> the rules with a vote in progress is unheard of.
MvdV> I submit:
MvdV> Had the 2 no votes not been cast, Bjorn would not be pleading to
MvdV> change his, therefore his regret over his own vote, is a sad
MvdV> consequence.
MvdV> I neither cast and up or down vote for Alexey just to avoid being
MvdV> cast in some negative light, but held back such vote because he did
MvdV> come across as worrying more about nit picking others than anything
MvdV> else..
MvdV> Since Sweden is the cradle of Democracy, I fail to see why Bjorn is
MvdV> scornful of others making a concious decision.
MvdV> Do not allow revotes, what you gonna do, allow others to change
MvdV> their votes if they dont like the direction the outcome is heading?
MvdV> NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
MvdV> Now if you want, you can after the election, put in a rule or rule
MvdV> change, which I still would object to a revote, but you could
MvdV> change the format to allow a yes vote or a non-vote, then each
MvdV> candidate would have to score 50% or 50%+1 of all voters(*)
MvdV> counted. You of course would be making this suggestion to the full
MvdV> FTSC, where we would fight over it and not ever agree.
MvdV> (*) If 20 voters then 10 or 11 yes votes needed.
MvdV> However I could see someone pitching a fit over non-votes and
MvdV> wanting to change their vote, see what happens here..
MvdV> Dont tilt at windmills Michiel, be strong, I am here for you!
MvdV> Of course you could make the balloting secret, only publishing the
MvdV> results after the election concluded, that would be a viable
MvdV> option.
MvdV> I can see you balking at this, but you could publicly acknowledge
MvdV> in here... "RC such and such voted" But dont publish the actual
MvdV> vote, until it is all tallied and too late.
MvdV> Felten, you know better than this. You must know ride down downtown
MvdV> Stockholm, nude on a moose with a Wolf on the loose.
MvdV> ==
MvdV> Ross
MvdV> Fidonet Feeds Or Fidonet In Your Newsreader:
MvdV> http://www.easternstar.info
MvdV> E-mail: ross(at)cassell(dot)us | Other Places:
MvdV> http://links.cassell.us
MvdV> We hoped and we got change!
MvdV> ... Liberals hold others to standards that they wont hold to
MvdV> themselves.
MvdV> -+- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20060121
MvdV> + Origin: The Eastern Star - Spartanburg, SC USA (1:123/456)
MvdV> == 38943 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 16 Nov 10 21:24:13
MvdV> From : Ross Cassell 1:123/456
MvdV> To : Michiel van der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hello Michiel!
MvdV> 17 Nov 10 01:40, you wrote to me:
RC>>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules..
MV>> Indeed, it is not in the rules. They do not explicitly allow
MV>> nor forbid it. So it can go either way.
MvdV> I think that when it comes to something like this, one should not
MvdV> fall back and say well the rules dont forbid it either.
MvdV> You leave room open for someone (a candidate) to protest the vote.
MvdV> You also leave room open for others (RC's and REC's) to also want
MvdV> to change their vote.
MvdV> As it is, with each vote you receive, you ack it then follow it
MvdV> with a tally of all votes counted thus far, including the one you
MvdV> just acked, now if you allow Bjorn to recast, you are going to
MvdV> have to allow others to recast, then you get a pissing match if
MvdV> others decide to recast ballots to counteract other recast votes..
MvdV> Dont open the box Pandora!
MvdV> ==
MvdV> Ross
MvdV> Fidonet Feeds Or Fidonet In Your Newsreader:
MvdV> http://www.easternstar.info
MvdV> E-mail: ross(at)cassell(dot)us | Other Places:
MvdV> http://links.cassell.us
MvdV> We hoped and we got change!
MvdV> ... Taxes are the sexual aphrodesiac for every Democrat.
MvdV> -+- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20060121
MvdV> + Origin: The Eastern Star - Spartanburg, SC USA (1:123/456)
MvdV> == 38944 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 16 Nov 10 21:48:20
MvdV> From : Janis Kracht 1:261/38
MvdV> To : Ross Cassell
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hi Ross,
>> I protest in the name of protocol..
>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules.. Changing
>> the rules with a vote in progress is unheard of.
MvdV> Thank you Ross for pointing this out.
MvdV> !! Note to Michiel: where do you draw the line if you allow this?
MvdV> I'm curious if you've thought it through.
MvdV> Take care,
MvdV> Janis
MvdV> -+- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
MvdV> + Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
MvdV> == 38945 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 16 Nov 10 21:51:58
MvdV> From : Janis Kracht 1:261/38
MvdV> To : Michiel van der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hello Michiel,
>>>> Hmmm... I don't know. There is no provision in the rules for
>>>> changing a vote thais already cast. OTOH, the rules do not forbid
>>>> it either. I lean towards allowing it, but only if there are no
>>>> serious objections from the constituency. It will set a precedent
>>>> either way. So let me sleep on it.
>>> I protest in the name of protocol..
>> Noted. And as someone with voting rights your opinion carries weight.
MvdV> Of course it does, my friend.. but please do not forget who asked
MvdV> their RCs to put you in office!
>>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules..
MvdV> Michiel, if you allow this, where do you draw the line as to WHEN
MvdV> people may change their vote?? And at WHAT point do you tell
MvdV> people when that point is?
MvdV> When you've seen that enough RCs and RECs have said to you, Ok,
MvdV> this is my final vote. For goodness sake, you sound like a game
MvdV> show host over here asking people, "Is that your final answer??"
MvdV> Seriously..
MvdV> Take care,
MvdV> Janis
MvdV> -+- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
MvdV> + Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
MvdV> == 38956 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 16 Nov 10 23:12:12
MvdV> From : Joe Delahaye 1:249/303
MvdV> To : Ross Cassell
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Re: Votes received.
MvdV> By: Ross Cassell to Michiel van der Vlist on Tue Nov 16 2010
MvdV> 18:22:54
>> I protest in the name of protocol..
>>
>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules.. Changing the
>> rules with a vote in progress is unheard of.
>>
MvdV> I have to agree with that. Once a vote is cast, it is done.
MvdV> -+- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
MvdV> + Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)
MvdV> == 39014 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 00:04:00
MvdV> From : Michael Luko 1:266/512
MvdV> To : Michiel Van Der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> -> Hmmm... I don't know. There is no provision in the rules for
MvdV> -> changing a vote thais already cast. OTOH, the rules do not
MvdV> forbid -> it either. I lean towards allowing it, but only if there
MvdV> are no -> serious objections from the constituency. It will set a
MvdV> precedent -> either way. So let me sleep on it.
MvdV> I could see allowing a resubmission based on a technicality or
MvdV> misunderstanding but not just based on how the voting is proceding.
MvdV> Unless you are in a vote for one amongst different candidates and
MvdV> the candidate in which the voter voted dropped out of the race.
MvdV> Then I could see allowing those who voted for the dropped candidate
MvdV> to resubmit a vote amongst the remaining candidates. I had a case
MvdV> last year where I wasn't very clear that on my regional feed back
MvdV> poll that each candidate was up for election. So I allowed those
MvdV> who only voted for one candidate to resubmit their ballot
MvdV> indicating a vote for each candidate unless of course they were
MvdV> actually abstaining on that candidate.
MvdV> If you allow changes based on the way someone doesn't like the
MvdV> way the results are going. You could run into the problem well so
MvdV> and so was able to change their vote because they didn't like the
MvdV> way things were going then I can do the same. We could have an
MvdV> never ending election process with everyone constantly changing
MvdV> ballots.
MvdV> -+- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462
MvdV> + Origin: Christian Fellowship | cfbbs.dtdns.net 856-933-7096
MvdV> (1:266/512)
MvdV> == 39008 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 00:09:56
MvdV> From : Jon Justvig 1:298/5
MvdV> To : Ross Cassell
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
>> Of course you could make the balloting secret, only publishing the
>> results after the election concluded, that would be a viable option.
>> I can see you balking at this, but you could publicly acknowledge in
>> here... "RC such and such voted" But dont publish the actual vote,
>> until it is all tallied and too late.
MvdV> I really agree with this. Seeing votes will also tell others to
MvdV> vote for this person and not this person. It done secretly and
MvdV> having the final vote seems like the fair way to me. Like pick a
MvdV> number out of a jar, if you win you win. <g>
MvdV> Sincerely,
MvdV> Jon Justvig
MvdV> -+- BBBS/LiI v4.10 Dada-1
MvdV> + Origin: Nightfall Ordain (1:298/5) (1:298/5)
MvdV> == 39015 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 00:17:00
MvdV> From : Michael Luko 1:266/512
MvdV> To : Ross Cassell
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> -> You also leave room open for others (RC's and REC's) to also
MvdV> want to -> change their vote. -> As it is, with each vote you
MvdV> receive, you ack it then follow it with -> a tally of all votes
MvdV> counted thus far, including the one you just -> acked, now if you
MvdV> allow Bjorn to recast, you are going to have to -> allow others to
MvdV> recast, then you get a pissing match if others -> decide to recast
MvdV> ballots to counteract other recast votes.. -> Dont open the box
MvdV> Pandora!
MvdV> Or opening a can of worms. :) The voting could go on forever and no
MvdV> where fast.
MvdV> -+- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462
MvdV> + Origin: Christian Fellowship | cfbbs.dtdns.net 856-933-7096
MvdV> (1:266/512)
MvdV> == 39011 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 00:20:48
MvdV> From : Jon Justvig 1:298/5
MvdV> To : Joe Delahaye
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
>> Re: Votes received.
>> By: Ross Cassell to Michiel van der Vlist on Tue Nov 16 2010 18:22:54
>>> I protest in the name of protocol..
>>>
>>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules.. Changing
>>> the rules with a vote in progress is unheard of.
>>>
>> I have to agree with that. Once a vote is cast, it is done.
MvdV> Sounds like a few kids in kindergarden to me. <g>
MvdV> Sincerely,
MvdV> Jon Justvig
MvdV> -+- BBBS/LiI v4.10 Dada-1
MvdV> + Origin: Nightfall Ordain (1:298/5) (1:298/5)
MvdV> == 38939 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 01:40:37
MvdV> From : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555
MvdV> To : Ross Cassell
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hello Ross,
MvdV> On Tuesday November 16 2010 18:22, you wrote to me:
MV>>> Hmmm... I don't know. There is no provision in the rules for
MV>>> changing a vote thais already cast. OTOH, the rules do not
MV>>> forbid it either. I lean towards allowing it, but only if there
MV>>> are no serious objections from the constituency. It will set a
MV>>> precedent either way. So let me sleep on it.
RC>> I protest in the name of protocol..
MvdV> Noted. And as someone with voting rights your opinion carries
MvdV> weight.
RC>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules..
MvdV> Indeed, it is not in the rules. They do not explicitly allow nor
MvdV> forbid it. So it can go either way.
RC>> Changing the rules with a vote in progress is unheard of.
MvdV> There is a difference between changing the rules and changing a
MvdV> vote. Changing the rules while the game is afoot is unheard of.
MvdV> Changing a vote is not. Not in this part of the world anyway.
MvdV> Changing a once cast vote is only problematic when votes are
MvdV> anonymous, as in that case it is not possible to know what the
MvdV> originally cast vote was that is to be retracted. In open elections
MvdV> this problem does not exist, so I see no basic problem.
MvdV> As a matter of fact, my RC - responding to my recomendation to
MvdV> consult the region - is now collecting votes from the sysops in the
MvdV> region over this very election. One sysop casted a vote that he
MvdV> retracted next day and cast a new one. My RC accepted. So it is not
MvdV> unheard of.
RC>> I submit:
RC>> Had the 2 no votes not been cast, Bjorn would not be pleading to
RC>> change his, therefore his regret over his own vote, is a sad
RC>> consequence.
MvdV> Possibly. It is however not for the vote collector or anyone else
MvdV> to question the motives of the voter. The same applies to a voter
MvdV> who requests a change of vote. When we deny it to one, we must deny
MvdV> it to all. When we allow it for one, we must allow it for all.
MvdV> Irrespective of the voter's motives.
MvdV> Let's sleep on it.
MvdV> Cheers, Michiel
MvdV> -+- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
MvdV> + Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
MvdV> == 39083 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 09:22:28
MvdV> From : Jon Justvig 1:298/5
MvdV> To : Björn Felten
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
>>> I really agree with this. Seeing votes will also tell others to vote
>>> for this person and not this person.
>> I totally agree. I was thinking wrongly. In the Swedish governmental
>> elections you can vote as many times you like, the votes are given a
>> time stam and the latest vote counts. But that's a closed election,
>> in an open election like this, of course you should not be allowed to
>> change your vote once it's being passed.
>> Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. I stand corrected. Please forget my
>> suggestion
>> ASAP!
MvdV> Forgiven. Just this time and this time only (sales pitch). <g>
MvdV> Sincerely,
MvdV> Jon Justvig
MvdV> -+- BBBS/LiI v4.10 Dada-1
MvdV> + Origin: Nightfall Ordain -- stepping.synchro.net:8080 (1:298/5)
MvdV> == 39084 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 09:27:34
MvdV> From : Jon Justvig 1:298/5
MvdV> To : Michiel Van Der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
>> Hello Janis,
>> On Tuesday November 16 2010 21:48, you wrote to Ross Cassell:
>>> !! Note to Michiel: where do you draw the line if you allow this?
>>> I'm curious if you've thought it through.
>> I said I was going to sleep on it didn't I? Whan I wrote that, I
>> already realised that without drawing lines things could get messy
>> if recasting votes were allowed.
MvdV> You said that but you must have a had a short nap. <g>
>> In the meantime I have slept on it.
MvdV> Bright and fitten like a kitten wearing mittens. <g>
>> However... the request for a recast is withdrawn, so we can drop the
>> issue.
MvdV> Thank goodness. I wonder too if this was thought all the way
MvdV> through. None-the-less it is resolved and we can go on with our
MvdV> merry lives.
MvdV> Sincerely,
MvdV> Jon Justvig
MvdV> -+- BBBS/LiI v4.10 Dada-1
MvdV> + Origin: Nightfall Ordain -- stepping.synchro.net:8080 (1:298/5)
MvdV> == 39104 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 10:55:00
MvdV> From : Bob Seaborn 1:140/12
MvdV> To : Ross Cassell
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> For what it's worth, I fully agree. Once a vote is posted, and
MvdV> acknowledged, it MUST stand as posted. No second thoughts, no
MvdV> changing!
>> Hello Michiel!
>>
>> 16 Nov 10 22:36, you wrote to Björn Felten:
>>
>> MV> Hmmm... I don't know. There is no provision in the rules for
>> MV> changing a vote thais already cast. OTOH, the rules do not
>> MV> forbid it either. I lean towards allowing it, but only if there
>> NV> are no serious objectionsfrom the constituency. It will set a
>> MV> precedent either way. So let me sleep on it.
>>
>> I protest in the name of protocol..
>>
>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules.. Changing
>> the rules with a vote in progress is unheard of.
>>
>> I submit:
>>
>> Had the 2 no votes not been cast, Bjorn would not be pleading to
>> change his, therefore his regret over his own vote, is a sad
>> consequence.
>>
>> I neither cast and up or down vote for Alexey just to avoid being
>> cast in some negative light, but held back such vote because he did
>> come across as worrying more about nit picking others than anything
>> else..
>>
>> Since Sweden is the cradle of Democracy, I fail to see why Bjorn is
>> scornful of others making a concious decision.
>>
>> Do not allow revotes, what you gonna do, allow others to change
>> their votes if they dont like the direction the outcome is heading?
>>
>> NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> Now if you want, you can after the election, put in a rule or rule
>> change, which I still would object to a revote, but you could change
>> the format to allow a yes vote or a non-vote, then each candidate
>> would have to score 50% or 50%+1 of all voters(*) counted. You of
>> course would be making this suggestion to the full FTSC, where we
>> would fight over it and not ever agree.
>>
>> (*) If 20 voters then 10 or 11 yes votes needed.
>>
>> However I could see someone pitching a fit over non-votes and
>> wanting to change their vote, see what happens here..
>>
>> Dont tilt at windmills Michiel, be strong, I am here for you!
>>
>> Of course you could make the balloting secret, only publishing
>> the results after the election concluded, that would be a viable
>> option.
>>
>> I can see you balking at this, but you could publicly acknowledge
>> in here... "RC such and such voted" But dont publish the actual
>> vote, until it is all tallied and too late.
>>
>> Felten, you know better than this. You must know ride down
>> downtown Stockholm, nude on a moose with a Wolf on the loose.
>>
>> ==
>> Ross
>> Fidonet Feeds Or Fidonet In Your Newsreader:
>> http://www.easternstar.infoE-mail: ross(at)cassell(dot)us | Other
>> Places: http://links.cassell.us
>>
>> We hoped and we got change!
>>
>> ... Liberals hold others to standards that they wont hold to
>> themselves.--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20060121
>> * Origin: The Eastern Star - Spartanburg, SC USA (1:123/456)
MvdV> -+- GEcho/32 & IM 2.50
MvdV> + Origin: RC17 (email to rc17@fidonet.ca) (1:140/12)
MvdV> == 39035 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 11:08:56
MvdV> From : Björn Felten 2:203/2
MvdV> To : Jon Justvig
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
JJ>> I really agree with this. Seeing votes will also tell others to
JJ>> vote for this person and not this person.
MvdV> I totally agree. I was thinking wrongly. In the Swedish
MvdV> governmental elections you can vote as many times you like, the
MvdV> votes are given a time stamp and the latest vote counts. But that's
MvdV> a closed election, in an open election like this, of course you
MvdV> should not be allowed to change your vote once it's being passed.
MvdV> Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. I stand corrected. Please forget my
MvdV> suggestion ASAP!
MvdV> -+- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; sv-SE; rv:1.9.2.12)
MvdV> Gecko/20101027
MvdV> + Origin: news://felten.yi.org (2:203/2)
MvdV> == 39062 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 12:52:06
MvdV> From : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555
MvdV> To : Janis Kracht
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hello Janis,
MvdV> On Tuesday November 16 2010 21:48, you wrote to Ross Cassell:
JK>> !! Note to Michiel: where do you draw the line if you allow
JK>> this? I'm curious if you've thought it through.
MvdV> I said I was going to sleep on it didn't I? When I wrote that, I
MvdV> already realised that without drawing lines things could get messy
MvdV> if recasting votes were allowed.
MvdV> In the meantime I have slept on it.
MvdV> However... the request for a recast is withdrawn, so we can drop
MvdV> the issue.
MvdV> Cheers, Michiel
MvdV> -+- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
MvdV> + Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
MvdV> == 39110 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 13:49:30
MvdV> From : Janis Kracht 1:261/38
MvdV> To : Michiel van der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hi Michiel,
>>> !! Note to Michiel: where do you draw the line if you allow this?
>>> I'm curious if you've thought it through.
>> I said I was going to sleep on it didn't I?
MvdV> Yes, you did.. Why you felt you had to say such a thing says a lot
MvdV> to me.
>> However... the request for a recast is withdrawn, so we can drop
>> the issue.
MvdV> Take care,
MvdV> Janis
MvdV> -+- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
MvdV> + Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
MvdV> == 39085 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 17 Nov 10 16:50:14
MvdV> From : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555
MvdV> To : Ross Cassell
MvdV> Subject : Voting rules
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> Hello Ross,
MvdV> On Tuesday November 16 2010 18:22, you wrote to me:
RC>> Now if you want, you can after the election, put in a rule or
RC>> rule change,
MvdV> The rules are laid down in FTA-1000. I do not have the mandate to
MvdV> change that all by my self.
RC>> course would be making this suggestion to the full FTSC, where
RC>> we would fight over it and not ever agree.
MvdV> That's FidoNet for you. We can never reach consesnsus, so trying to
MvdV> change the election rules wpould probably be the umpteenth exercise
MvdV> in futility.
RC>> Of course you could make the balloting secret, only publishing
RC>> the results after the election concluded, that would be a viable
RC>> option.
MvdV> A secret ballot is fine if all the voters are in the same room,
MvdV> write their vote on a voting slip, which are then thrown in a hat
MvdV> and counted.
MvdV> If they are not physically in the same room with the vote
MvdV> collector(s) there is nothing that stops the vote collector from
MvdV> manipulating the votes. It has happened. Even in R28.
MvdV> Cheers, Michiel
MvdV> -+- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
MvdV> + Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
MvdV> == 39264 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 18 Nov 10 16:46:26
MvdV> From : Roger Nelson 1:3828/7
MvdV> To : Michiel van der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
MvdV> On Tue 2010-Nov-16 22:36, Michiel van der Vlist (2:2/20) wrote to
MvdV> Björn Felten:
MvdV>> Hello Björn,
MvdV>> On Tuesday November 16 2010 14:23, you wrote to me:
BF>> Dear Mr. Voting Admin, I only voted for the two persons that
BF>> I know from way back, but please accept my alternate vote:
MvdV>> Hmmm... I don't know. There is no provision in the rules
MvdV>> for changing a vote thais already cast. OTOH, the rules do not
MvdV>> forbid it either. I lean towards allowing it, but only if there
MvdV>> are no serious objections from the constituency. It will set a
MvdV>> precedent either way. So let me sleep on it.
MvdV> I wouldn't. Once a vote is cast, it is done. If you allow this
MvdV> you will be opening Pandora's Box.
MvdV> Regards,
MvdV> Roger
MvdV> -+- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+
MvdV> + Origin: NCS BBS - Houma, LA - (1:3828/7)
MvdV> == 39267 ================================================
MvdV> Date : 18 Nov 10 21:04:09
MvdV> From : mark lewis 1:3634/12
MvdV> To : Michiel van der Vlist
MvdV> Subject : Votes received.
MvdV> --------------------------------------------------------
MvdV> AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
BF>> Dear Mr. Voting Admin, I only voted for the two persons that
BF>> I know from way back, but please accept my alternate vote:
MvdV>> Hmmm... I don't know. There is no provision in the rules for
MvdV>> changing a vote thais already cast. OTOH, the rules do not
MvdV>> forbid it either. I lean towards allowing it, but only if there
MvdV>> are no serious objections from the constituency. It will set a
MvdV>> precedent either way. So let me sleep on it.
RN>> I wouldn't. Once a vote is cast, it is done. If you allow this
RN>> you will be opening Pandora's Box.
MvdV> i have to agree... it has never been done before and it is not
MvdV> allowed in any other voting procedures that i'm aware of... if
MvdV> there is a procedure for a revote, then that would possibly come
MvdV> into play depending on the circumstances...
MvdV> one might also take a look at history and look at the negative
MvdV> votes i got for my actions during the campanging portion of the
MvdV> last election process ;)
MvdV> )\/(ark
MvdV> + Origin: (1:3634/12)
MvdV> ==== end ====
MvdV> With thanks to Kees van Eeten for opening his archive.
MvdV> --- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20110320
MvdV> * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
R\%/itt - K5RXT
Reminder: "On Friday September 8th 2006, Mike Godwin's 16 year experiment
was concluded and Godwin's Law was officially repealed by a MAJORITY vote
among millions of individuals." http://repealgodwin.tripod.com/
--- Ya have ta ask yourself: What Would Roy Witt Do?
* Origin: Lone-Star Hub - Gulf Coast Distribution - USA (1:387/22)
|