In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (on 24 September
2008 23:05:05 +0000), [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(=?iso-8859-1?B?U3TpcGhhbmUgUm91aWxsb24=?=) wrote:
>for an anti-fraud purpose, the capacity to repeat the counting operation is
>a must. Hence I recommand to use a reproductible random procedure to break
>ties. This allows the use of different computers to reproduce the counting
>operation, while always obtaining the same result despite ties.
Cryptographically secure hashing methods would appear to be the appropriate
way to do this, using the ballots and/or some other agreed-upon information
(e.g., the year of the election in a specified coding, the names of the
candidates in a specified format...). I'm not sure whether it would be a
good idea to set it up such that the tie-breaking couldn't be computed
before the ballots came in (as would be possible if all the information
needed for it was known in advance).
-Allen
--
Allen Smith, Ph.D. http://cesario.rutgers.edu/easmith/
September 11, 2001 A Day That Shall Live In Infamy II
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
