P.S. Works best with margins. Juho
On Oct 15, 2006, at 13:24 , Juho wrote: > On Oct 15, 2006, at 7:02 , Dave Ketchum wrote: > >> Note that many voters will vote the same as for Plurality, for >> which a special form might be possible. > > Yes, there is space for optimisation. Storing plurality style votes > as they are should not be a big problem (for privacy in most cases). > In situations where there are many candidates (e.g. 100) voters > probably typically name only few of their top preferences. Let's say > that the voter votes A>B>C. One could first break this vote in three > separate votes: A, B and C. But this is not exactly the same as the > original vote, so one needs to fix the preferences between A, B and > C. That would lead to additional [A>B], [A>C] and [B>C] ballots > (where brackets mean that these ballots refer to only one pairwise > comparison). This type of vote splitting saves a lot in the number of > ballots if number of candidates is low and number of candidate > entries is low in each vote. Privacy is still quite good. Voters will > have it more difficult to check that their vote is recorded as > intended (if they are supposed to check the paper ballots). Maybe > sufficient number of voters are able to make the required checks to > keep the probability of error/cheating detection high. > >> I would DEMAND that the record being prepared for hard disk have >> the ballots in true random order (sometimes those needing a random >> sequence of numbers use a formula that would give the same results >> tomorrow as it did today), >> Thinking, without studying, could the space used for >> accumulating data for records for this hard disk be such that no >> data would be lost even with expectable power failures? > > I think all this is doable with open source but of course requires > more work than ordinary software development. > > Some remaining threats/problems: > - open source and known platform also makes it possible to develop > alternative code that could be somehow smuggled in to the voting > machine (and the code could delete itself / return to the original > code after the election) > - we may need solutions also for the case where only very few voters > have voted with the machine ad we therefore need to merge those votes > with some other lots of votes to guarantee privacy > > Juho Laatu > > Send instant messages to your online friends http:// > uk.messenger.yahoo.com > ---- > election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for > list info Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
