Ok, there are multiple topics.
Any voter can want secrecy and, if so, should have that protection so
that the voter can vote as preferred without risking problems with
enemies.
You write often about a different class of voters who do not want such
secrecy. While not convinced of the value of supporting such, my most
critical interest is that helping these should not be done in a way
that can interfere with the secrecy that can be wanted and thus should
be provided for the first group.
On Jan 13, 2010, at 8:50 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 07:10 PM 1/11/2010, Dave Ketchum wrote:
The possible excitement tangles with the secrecy laws - reporting
in a
manner that identifies how ANY ONE voter voted needs preventing
(needed protection of voters).
There is a problem with ranked ballots and true write-in votes: a
voter may identify the ballot specifically and clearly. The voter
writes in their own name. In last rank, that has practically no
effect. With plurality, the write-in shows, but it then makes the
ballot moot, generally. (If it's unique, it's moot!) Vote-coercers
don't want the person to vote for themselves! And a mark in any
other place than the write-in place invalidates the ballot, and any
writing in the write-in -- any at all -- generally invalidates a
vote for any other candidate.
...
Dave Ketchum
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
