Text 11485, 416 rader
Skriven 2013-12-09 00:03:57 av FidoNews Robot (2:2/2.0)
Ärende: FidoNews 30:49 [03/10]: General Articles
================================================
=================================================================
GENERAL ARTICLES
=================================================================
Why a vote cast is a vote cast.
By Michiel van der Vlist, 2:280/5555
In the 2010 FSTC election Björn Felten requested that
he be allowed to correct his already cast vote. The
EC responded with "let me sleep on it". This is a
summary of the storm of protest that followed. Read
and judge for yourself...
==== begin ====
== 38937 ================================================
Date : 16 Nov 10 18:22:54
From : Ross Cassell 1:123/456
To : Michiel van der Vlist
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
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
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.
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.info
E-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)
== 38943 ================================================
Date : 16 Nov 10 21:24:13
From : Ross Cassell 1:123/456
To : Michiel van der Vlist
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
Hello Michiel!
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.
I think that when it comes to something like this, one should not
fall back and say well the rules dont forbid it either.
You leave room open for someone (a candidate) to protest the vote.
You also leave room open for others (RC's and REC's) to also want
to change their vote.
As it is, with each vote you receive, you ack it then follow it
with a tally of all votes counted thus far, including the one you
just acked, now if you allow Bjorn to recast, you are going to
have to allow others to recast, then you get a pissing match if
others decide to recast ballots to counteract other recast votes..
Dont open the box Pandora!
==
Ross
Fidonet Feeds Or Fidonet In Your Newsreader:
http://www.easternstar.info
E-mail: ross(at)cassell(dot)us | Other Places: http://links.cassell.us
We hoped and we got change!
... Taxes are the sexual aphrodesiac for every Democrat.
-+- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.5-b20060121
+ Origin: The Eastern Star - Spartanburg, SC USA (1:123/456)
== 38944 ================================================
Date : 16 Nov 10 21:48:20
From : Janis Kracht 1:261/38
To : Ross Cassell
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
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.
Thank you Ross for pointing this out.
!! Note to Michiel: where do you draw the line if you allow this?
I'm curious if you've thought it through.
Take care,
Janis
-+- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
+ Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
== 38945 ================================================
Date : 16 Nov 10 21:51:58
From : Janis Kracht 1:261/38
To : Michiel van der Vlist
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
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.
Of course it does, my friend.. but please do not forget who asked
their RCs to put you in office!
>> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules..
Michiel, if you allow this, where do you draw the line as to WHEN
people may change their vote?? And at WHAT point do you tell people
when that point is?
When you've seen that enough RCs and RECs have said to you, Ok, this
is my final vote. For goodness sake, you sound like a game show host
over here asking people, "Is that your final answer??"
Seriously..
Take care,
Janis
-+- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag
+ Origin: Prism bbs (1:261/38)
== 38956 ================================================
Date : 16 Nov 10 23:12:12
From : Joe Delahaye 1:249/303
To : Ross Cassell
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
Re: Votes received.
By: Ross Cassell to Michiel van der Vlist on Tue Nov 16 2010 18:22:5
> 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.
-+- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32
+ Origin: The Lions Den BBS, Trenton, On, CDN (1:249/303)
== 39014 ================================================
Date : 17 Nov 10 00:04:00
From : Michael Luko 1:266/512
To : Michiel Van Der Vlist
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
-> 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 could see allowing a resubmission based on a technicality or
misunderstanding but not just based on how the voting is proceding.
Unless you are in a vote for one amongst different candidates and the
candidate in which the voter voted dropped out of the race. Then I
could see allowing those who voted for the dropped candidate to
resubmit a vote amongst the remaining candidates. I had a case last
year where I wasn't very clear that on my regional feed back poll
that each candidate was up for election. So I allowed those who only
voted for one candidate to resubmit their ballot indicating a vote
for each candidate unless of course they were actually abstaining
on that candidate.
If you allow changes based on the way someone doesn't like the way
the results are going. You could run into the problem well so and so
was able to change their vote because they didn't like the way things
were going then I can do the same. We could have an never ending
election process with everyone constantly changing ballots.
-+- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462
+ Origin: Christian Fellowship | cfbbs.dtdns.net 856-933-7096
(1:266/512)
== 39008 ================================================
Date : 17 Nov 10 00:09:56
From : Jon Justvig 1:298/5
To : Ross Cassell
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
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.
I really agree with this. Seeing votes will also tell others to vote
for this person and not this person. It done secretly and having the
final vote seems like the fair way to me. Like pick a number out of
a jar, if you win you win.
<g>
Sincerely,
Jon Justvig
-+- BBBS/LiI v4.10 Dada-1
+ Origin: Nightfall Ordain (1:298/5) (1:298/5)
== 39015 ================================================
Date : 17 Nov 10 00:17:00
From : Michael Luko 1:266/512
To : Ross Cassell
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
-> You also leave room open for others (RC's and REC's) to also want
-> to change their vote.
-> As it is, with each vote you receive, you ack it then follow it
-> with a tally of all votes counted thus far, including the one you
-> acked, now if you allow Bjorn to recast, you are going to have to
-> just allow others to recast, then you get a pissing match if others
-> decide to recast ballots to counteract other recast votes..
-> Dont open the box Pandora!
Or opening a can of worms. :) The voting could go on forever and no
where fast.
-+- QScan/PCB v1.20a / 01-0462
+ Origin: Christian Fellowship | cfbbs.dtdns.net 856-933-7096
(1:266/512)
== 39011 ================================================
Date : 17 Nov 10 00:20:48
From : Jon Justvig 1:298/5
To : Joe Delahaye
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
> Re: Votes received.
> By: Ross Cassell to Michiel van der Vlist on Tue Nov 16 2010 18:22:5
>> 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.
Sounds like a few kids in kindergarden to me. <g>
Sincerely,
Jon Justvig
-+- BBBS/LiI v4.10 Dada-1
+ Origin: Nightfall Ordain (1:298/5) (1:298/5)
== 38939 ================================================
Date : 17 Nov 10 01:40:37
From : Michiel van der Vlist 2:280/5555
To : Ross Cassell
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
AREA:FTSC_PUBLIC
Hello Ross,
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..
Noted. And as someone with voting rights your opinion carries weight.
RC> If it is not in the rules, then it is not in the rules..
Indeed, it is not in the rules. They do not explicitly allow nor
forbid it. So it can go either way.
RC> Changing the rules with a vote in progress is unheard of.
There is a difference between changing the rules and changing a vote.
Changing the rules while the game is afoot is unheard of. Changing a
vote is not. Not in this part of the world anyway. Changing a once
cast vote is only problematic when votes are anonymous, as in that
case it is not possible to know what the originally cast vote was that
is to be retracted. In open elections this problem does not exist, so
I see no basic problem.
As a matter of fact, my RC - responding to my recomendation to consult
the region - is now collecting votes from the sysops in the region
over this very election. One sysop casted a vote that he retracted
next day and cast a new one. My RC accepted. So it is not 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.
Possibly. It is however not for the vote collector or anyone else to
question the motives of the voter. The same applies to a voter who
requests a change of vote. When we deny it to one, we must deny it to
all. When we allow it for one, we must allow it for all. Irrespective
of the voter's motives.
Let's sleep on it.
Cheers, Michiel
-+- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
+ Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
== 39083 ================================================
Date : 17 Nov 10 09:22:28
From : Jon Justvig 1:298/5
To : Björn Felten
Subject : Votes received.
--------------------------------------------------------
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
--- Azure/NewsPrep 3.0
* Origin: Home of the Fidonews (2:2/2.0)
|