The problem with an attack like this is that it requires a lot of co-conspirators. An attack by a few people may work in the absence of a paper trail (at least until someone gets a profitable book deal), but for this attack to succeed, everyone would have to A) Copy his "against Bush" votes to someone without telling anyone else B) Give the *only* copy of the vote to his party leaders
Let's say that a hard-core Republican has a 99% probability of following party leaders and not checking to see if his vote was altered later on. With just 70 people you have a less than 50 percent chance of keeping it a secret. Even the Florida mess in 2000 had a bigger difference than this. Personally, I think 99% is a wild overestimate -- my guess is that 70-80% is more reasonable even for true diehards. Michael Rouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Apologies to WDS for giving you two copies -- I hit reply and sent it w/o realizing I didn't put the EM address in the box.) > Nasty new attack on Rivest 3ballot scheme and similar schemes: > (I sent this to Rivest the other day...) > > 1. Republican voters all vote for Bush, which they do > (I discuss in 3-ballot for simplicity, but this attack will also work > against my "boffo" scheme which repairs 3-ballot against the > redundant-info > http://rangevoting.org/Rivest3B.html > attacks; and it also works against receipt-swapping schemes...) by > voting for, for, and against Bush. > > 2. They copy their "against Bush" ballot. > > 3. They turn in all their receipts to the friendly local Republican > party boss at their born-again-Christian bible meeting, > who'd told them all ahead of time he'd like to have their receipts for > "safe keeping," and he'd like their "against Bush" receipts. > (Oh, and he'd like their "for Clinton" receipts too, by the way.) > > 4. Republican party corrupt bigwigs like DeLay > arrange with the govt election office > (the officials in which, they of course all appointed in the first > place ala Ken Tomlinson solely because they were party hacks who'd > helped gerrymander Texas) to alter all those against-Bush votes to > "for Bush" and to alter all those "for Clinton" votes to "against" - > and then BURNS its receipt collection (or at least the part of it that > they used). > > 5. As a result, the vote shifts by several percent in Bush's favor and > he wins. > > (Meanwhile the Dems could try the same stuff other way round... > if you do not like my anti-Republican story-sound, then plug in your > favorite other party and other country...) > > Warren D. Smith > http://rangevoting.org <-- add your endorsement > > > > > > (Maybe somebody can think of a way out... at present the best > I have is the same stuff I suggested in > http://rangevoting.org/Rivest3B.html > to diminish the "dumpster diver" attack...) > > ---- > election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list > info ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
