One approach that is used in practice and that to some extent avoids the problems of
- "few random votes to random people" - difficulty to identify to whom the votes actually are meant - votes to people that do not want to be candidates - having too many candidates is to require people to collect an agreed number of names of supporters (and candidate's agreement) to get their candidate on the candidate list. Juho --- On Fri, 26/12/08, Dave Ketchum <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 14:55:23 -0000 James Gilmour wrote: > > > > Incidentally, my personal view is that there should be > no provision for "write-ins" at all in public > elections. If I am not > > prepared to declare myself as candidate and be > nominated in the same way as all the other candidates, I > cannot see any reason why > > anyone should take me seriously. If my > "friends" think I would be the best person to do > the job, they should come and tell me and > > persuade me to stand, nominate me, and then campaign > like fury to get me elected. > > > Worth some thought: > > I think "nominate" has been thoroughly defined, > and should not be changed as part of this debate. > > Something such as "authorized for write-in" could > be developed: > Approved by candidate BEFORE the election. This would > outlaw some of the present nonsense. > Perhaps James could offer useful thought. > > > > James > -- [email protected] > people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek > Dave Ketchum 108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY 13827-1708 > 607-687-5026 > Do to no one what you would not want done to > you. > If you want peace, work for justice. > > > > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see > http://electorama.com/em for list info ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
